Related Experiment Videos
Evaluating standards in cross-language research: a critique of Squires' criteria
Elizabeth J Croot1, Janet Lees, Gordon Grant
1University of Sheffield, School of Health and Related Research, 219 Portabello, Sheffield, S1 4DA, United Kingdom. l.croot@sheffield.ac.uk
Abstract:
Innovative methods to conduct cross-language research continue to evolve. There is a need to evaluate the processes involved in cross-language research to assess the extent to which they are fit for purpose from an epistemological point of view, and the subsequent impact on quality of resultant findings. Debate continues about the application of evaluative criteria to qualitative research, not least because of the multiplicity of worldviews and perspectives associated with different qualitative research paradigms. In this article we use two of the authors' studies to discuss how we assess whether methodologies underpinning cross-language research and the choice of methods used are 'fit for purpose'. We use Squires' (2009) 14 criteria to evaluate cross-language nursing and health sciences research based around conceptual equivalence, translator credentials, translator role/competence and study methods, and consider their value as an heuristic or a guide to encourage reflexivity and fuller accounting of the justifications for the approaches taken.
Related Concept Videos
Stereotype Content Model
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Humanistic Psychology
This approach...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I
Sources of Self-Esteem III: Social Comparison
Measures of Intelligence
Validity refers to how well a test measures what it claims to measure. An intelligence test should accurately assess intelligence rather than another characteristic, like anxiety. Criterion validity is one way to evaluate this; it...