Nitel Araştırmalarda Titizlik

Year 2021, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 1 - 14, 01.07.2021

Sevim Akşit

Abstract

Bilimsel çalışmalar, uygulamalı spor ortamlarında, 'hızlı' çalışan uygulayıcıların 'yavaş' çalışan araştırmacılarla çalışması gerektiği fikrini desteklemektedir. Ancak bu birlikte çalışma; ekonomik ve lojistik kısıtlamalar nedeniyle her zaman mümkün değildir. Bu nedenle yazarlar tarafından araştırma ve uygulama arasındaki boşluğu kapatmanın alternatif yöntemleri tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Bu, özellikle sosyal ve beşeri bilimlerde bir zorunluluktur. Bu çalışmanın amacı beden eğitimi pedagojisi, spor ve egzersiz, spor psikolojisi, eğitim ve sosyal bilimler alanlarında nitel araştırma paradigması çerçevesinde genelleme, güvenirlik ve geçerlik ölçütlerini incelemektir. Bu doğrultuda araştırma için çevrimiçi arama motoru aracılığıyla alanyazın taranmıştır. Çalışmadaki makaleler 2014 ve 2020 yılları arasında “Google Research, Academic Search Complete, SPORTDiscus ve Eric” veri tabanlarında yayımlanan araştırma problemine uygun makalelerden seçilmiştir. Araştırma problemine ve ölçüt kriterlerine uygun toplam 334 makaleden 15 makale çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Her bir makaleden ilgili bilginin çıkarılması ile ölçüt kriterlerine uyan araştırma bulguları oluşturulmuştur. Belirgin "anlam birimleri" tanımlanmış ve benzerleri paylaşan konu anlamları ile birlikte kümeleştirilerek konuların bir listesi oluşturulmuştur. Bu konular iki başlık altında toplanmıştır (Genellenebilirlik, Güvenirlik-Geçerlik): Bulgulara göre, nitel araştırmalarda önceden belirlenmiş ölçütler aranmadığı gibi her çalışmanın niteliğinin ayrı değerlendirilmesi gerektiği, ayrıca genel ölçüt ve genel strateji belirlenmesinin mümkün olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Çalışma sonunda araştırmaya dayalı nitel araştırma paradigması çerçevesinde bazı önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

Spor, Nitel araştırmalar, Geçerlik, Güvenirlik, Genellenebilirlik

Meticulously in Qualitative Research

Abstract

Scientific research supports the idea that in applied sports settings, practitioners who work 'fast' to produce researchers who work 'slowly'. But this is not working together; Due to economic and logistical constraints its time is not possible. Alternative methods of bridging the gap between research and practice by writing with this have been explored. This is a must, especially in the social sciences and humanities. This aim is to examine the reliability and validity criteria within the framework of physical education pedagogy, sport and exercise, sports psychology, education and social sciences generalization. In this direction, the search engine translation literature was scanned. The articles in the study were selected from the articles suitable for the research problem published in the databases of "Google Research, Academic Search Complete, SPORTDiscus and Eric" between 2014 and 2020. 15 articles from a total of 334 articles in accordance with the research problem and criteria were included. By extracting relevant information from each article, a research cloud that meets the criteria was created. A distinct "riddle" was defined and a list of topics was created by clustering together with the use of topics that shared similarities. These topics are grouped under two headings (Generalizability, Reliability-Validity): According to the findings, it is possible to combine its order by researching qualitatively, but also to determine general criteria and general. In the workbook, suggestions are made within the scope of the research paradigm according to the research.

Keywords

Sport, Qualitative research, Validity, Reliability, Generalizability

References

• Biggs, MA. & Büchler D. (2007). Rigor and practice-based research. Design issues, 23(3), 62-69.
• Bridges-Rhoads S, Cleave, JV, Hughes HE. (2016). Complicating methodological transparency. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(4), 536-552.
• Culver, D. M., Gilbert, W., & Sparkes, A. (2012). Qualitative research in sport psychology journals: The next decade 2000-2009 and beyond. The Sport Psychologist, 26(2), 261-281.
• De Witt, L., & Ploeg, J. (2006). Critical appraisal of rigour in interpretive phenomenological nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55, 215–229. PubMed doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2648.2006.03898.x
• Dennis, B. (2018). Validity as research praxis: a study of self-reflection and engagement in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(10).
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage.
• Denzin, NK. (2017). Critical qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23, 8–16.
• Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discoveryof Grounded Theory. Aldine Publishing Company, Hawthorne, NY
• Hays, D., Wood, C., Dahl, H. & Kirk-Jenkins A. (2016). Methodological rigor in journal of counseling & development qualitative research articles: A 15-Year Review. Journal of Counseling & Development, 94-106.
• Hemingway, P., & Brereton, N. (2009). What is a systematic review? Retrieved September 20, 2011, from http://www.whatisseries.co.uk/whatis/
• Karaçam, Z. (2013). Sistematik derleme metodolojisi: Sistematik derleme hazırlamak için bir rehber. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 6(1), 26-33.
• Kozleski, EB. (2017). The uses of qualitative research: powerful methods to inform evidence-based practice. Education Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42(1), 19– 32.
• Lub, V. (2015). Validity in qualitative evaluation: linking purposes, paradigms, and perspectives. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1–8.
• Marttinen, R., Landi, D., Novak, D., & Silverman, S. (2019). A Systematic Analysis of Research on Teaching in Physical Education: Two Decades of Progress. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 1(aop), 1-10.
• Machingambi, Z.& Mabiza, E. (2018). Changıng perspectıves in the issues of generalısabılıty, valıdıty and relıabılıty as applıed to the qualıtatıve research paradıgma. Asian Journal Of Educational Research, 6(1).
• Maher, C., Hadfield, M., Hutchings, M., & de Eyto, A. (2018). Ensuring rigor in qualitative data analysis: A design research approach to coding combining NVivo with traditional material methods. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1609406918786362.
• Mays, N. & Pope C. (1995). Qualitative research: rigour and qualitative research. Bmj, 311(6997), 109-112.
• McGannon, K. R., Smith, B., Kendellen, K., & Gonsalves, C. A. (2019). Qualitative research in six sport and exercise psychology journals between 2010 and 2017: An updated and expanded review of trends and interpretations. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1-21.
• Moher, D, Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, DG., The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
• Poucher, Z. A., Tamminen, K. A., Caron, J. G., & Sweet, S. N. (2020). Thinking through and designing qualitative research studies: A focused mapping review of 30 years of qualitative research in sport psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13(1), 163-186.
• Ronkainen, N. J., & Wiltshire, G. (2019). Rethinking validity in qualitative sport and exercise psychology research: a realist perspective. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1-16.
• Sandelowski M. (1986). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in nursing science, 8(3), 27–37.
• Smith B, McGannonb KR. (2018). Developing rigor in qualitative research: problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 101-121.
• Smith, B. (2018). Generalizability in qualitative research: misunderstandings, opportunities and recommendations for the sport and exercise sciences. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 10(1), 137–149.
• Smith, B. (2018). Qualitative research: developing rigor. The Sport and Exercise Scientist, 56, 24-25.
• Tracy, SJ. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight ‘big-tent’ criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 837–851.
• Turan, S. (Ed.).(2013). nitel araştırma desen ve uygulama için bir Rehber (3. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Zitomer, MR. & Goodwin D. (2014). Gauging the quality of ualitative research in adapted physical activity. The Quality of Ualitative Research in Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31, 193-218.