A seat at the table: addressing validity from critical perspective

Q1 Social Sciences
Michelle T. Violanti
{"title":"A seat at the table: addressing validity from critical perspective","authors":"Michelle T. Violanti","doi":"10.1080/23808985.2020.1792794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay argues that those who create and consume research from a critical perspective should be concerned with issues of validity. An analysis of National and International Communication association journals publishing critical work found extremely limited attention to validity. Critical validity looks different than construct and measurement validity in a post-positivistic perspective. Specifically, a critical perspective needs to address construct, expert, transactional, and catalytic. Those who are evaluating critical research should focus on the extent to which researchers engage in authenticity, coherence, criticality, dialogue and self-reflection, plausibility, reflexivity, and transparency; examples of how these might be achieved are included.","PeriodicalId":36859,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the International Communication Association","volume":"22 1","pages":"248 - 257"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the International Communication Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1792794","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This essay argues that those who create and consume research from a critical perspective should be concerned with issues of validity. An analysis of National and International Communication association journals publishing critical work found extremely limited attention to validity. Critical validity looks different than construct and measurement validity in a post-positivistic perspective. Specifically, a critical perspective needs to address construct, expert, transactional, and catalytic. Those who are evaluating critical research should focus on the extent to which researchers engage in authenticity, coherence, criticality, dialogue and self-reflection, plausibility, reflexivity, and transparency; examples of how these might be achieved are included.
一个席位:从批判的角度解决有效性问题
摘要本文认为,那些从批判的角度创造和消费研究的人应该关注有效性问题。一项对国家和国际传播协会期刊发表的关键工作的分析发现,对有效性的关注极为有限。后实证主义视角下的批判性效度不同于建构效度和测量效度。具体来说,一个批判的视角需要处理构建、专家、交易和催化。那些评估批判性研究的人应该关注研究人员从事真实性、连贯性、批判性、对话和自我反思、合理性、反身性和透明度的程度;包括如何实现这些目标的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信