IMCA Seminar - Lakshmi B.Nair - room A23 - 13.30-15.00
Institute of Marketing and Communication Management
Start date: 05.04.2012
End date: 06.04.2012
Internal Validity in Case Study Research
Internal validity is the confidence which can be placed in the cause and effect relationship in a study. It is an issue of causality and correlation. The causal relationship between two variables should be properly demonstrable to ascertain that a particular inference has internal validity. It makes sure the results of a study are not affected by unaccountable influences, but only by the particular phenomenon(a) under study. Both qualitative and quantitative studies have to confront this issue of the warrant for their inferences.
Internal validity of a quantitative study can be jeopardized by numerous factors like history, maturation, confounding, bias, instrumentality etc. which are briefly described in the article. Internal validity or credibility (as put forth by a prominent interpretivist), in qualitative research is yet another game. Internal validity in case study research, particularly, is dealt with here. Case study research, a form of qualitative research, is an inquiry which investigates a particular contemporary phenomenon in its own context. It is mostly used in the critical, early phases of the development of a theory in the academic world and also in real management situations. Hence, any spuriousness in the early stages of the study, if unattended to, would cause a ripple effect in all the corresponding stages. It is in this context, internal validity checks in case study research gain importance. In this scenario, scientists believing in the two different paradigms of positivism and interpretivism discuss different proactive and reactive interferences to avoid internal invalidity. Positivists are black and white thinkers who favor quantitative data.
They insist on objectivity and neutrality. The reality and person are viewed as separate from each other by them. Some of the tests suggested include cross checking results, using well established research methods etc., more of which are discussed in the article. Interpretivists or constructivists believe in understanding human experiences and treating them as critical to explanation, control and prediction. Interpretivists favor qualitative data and most of the tests discussed here are suggested by them. A few of them being triangulation, pattern matching, peer review and so on. Finally, similar tests advocated by different scientists are clubbed together to form a new set of codes to ascertain the presence or absence of internal validity in case study research. The article paves the way for creating a novel set of criteria for ascertaining the internal validity, and in turn the legitimacy of case study research.
