Validity Issues in Narrative Research

Abstract

Attention to the judgments about the validity of research-generated knowledge claims is integral to all social science research. During the past several decades, knowledge development has been split into two communities: conventional researchers and reformist researchers. Narrative research is positioned within the reformist community. The two communities use different kinds of data and employ different analytic processes. In both communities, researchers develop arguments to convince readers of the validity of their knowledge claims. Both need to respond to threats to validity inherent in their designs. The threats particular to narrative research relate to two areas: the differences in people's experienced meaning and the stories they tell about this meaning and the connections between storied texts and the interpretations of those texts.

Keywords

interpretation narrative research validity

References

Bazerman, C. (1987). Codifying the social scientific style: The APA Publication Manual as a behaviorist rhetoric. In J. S. Nelson , A. Megill , & D. N. McCloskey (Eds.), The rhetoric of the human sciences: Language and argument in scholarship and public affairs (pp. 125-144). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Berman, A. (1988). From the new criticism to deconstruction: The reception of structuralism and post-structuralism. Urbana : University of Illinois Press.

Campbell, D.T. , & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally .

Gendlin, E.T. (1997). How philosophy cannot appeal to experience, and how it can. In D. M. Levin (Ed.), Language beyond postmodernism: Saying and thinking in Gendlin's philosophy (pp. 3-41). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

Greenwood, D.J. , & Levin, M. (1998). Introduction to action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, vol. 1, reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon. (Original work published 1981)

Isaac, S. , & Michael, W.B. (1987). Handbook in research and evaluation (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: EdITS Publishers.

Lieblich, A. , Tuval-Mashiach, R. , & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Readings, analysis, and interpretation . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). New York: Humanities. (Original work published 1945)

10.

Microsoft. (2003). Encarta Reference Library 2003 [CD]. Redmond, WA: Author.

11.

Mishler, E.G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

12.

Murphy, G.L. (2002). The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

13.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

14.

Perelman, C. (1982). The realm of rhetoric (W. Kluback, Trans.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

15.

Polkinghorne, D.E. (1983). Methodology for the human sciences: Systems of inquiry. Albany: State University of New York Press.

16.

Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative (Vol. 1). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

17.

Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27-48). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

18.

Schwandt, T.J. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretation, hermeneutics, and social construction. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189-213). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

19.

Seidman, I.E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York: Teachers College Press.

20.

Shavelson, R. J. , & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

21.

Simpson, J. (Ed.). (2002). Oxford English dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

22.

Spence, D.P. (1982). Narrative truth and historical truth. New York: Norton.

23.

Stringer, E.T. (1996). Action research: Handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

24.

Toulmin, S.E. (1958). Uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Whitehurst, G.J. (June, 2003). Evidence-based education. Retrieved June 20, 2003, from www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/whatworks/eb/edlite-index.html