Why Triangulate? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Research triangulation, over the years, has gained much popularity as researchers become more sophisticated in generating and testing theories. Indeed of what use is research whose findings are unreliable and invalid? Answers to research questions are expected to be as close as they possibly can to the reality if they cannot be perfectly accurate. Researchers find a way of producing reliable results by making use of research triangulation. This paper seeks to identify advantages that come with a researcher making use of research triangulation in a study. According to Noble and Heale (2019), research triangulation refers to the process that helps to increase the credibility and validity of research. In other words, research triangulation basically aims at validating the results of a study. Triangulation, sometimes, makes use of mixed methods to achieve the aim of validating research findings. However, triangulation is not the same as mixed methods. Mixed methods basically combine quantitative and qualitative research approaches in getting research questions answered; while triangulation describes how the researcher makes use of all the multiple approaches in the study to extract the required information as well as critically analysing findings (Social Sciences Research Laboratories, 2018); thus establishing validity and credibility. Validity in research basically establishes how correctly a particular approach measures something and how closely findings are to actual values or concepts being examined (Noble & Heale, 2019). It indicates whether findings from a particular research can be trusted. Achieving validity is very important to ensure that findings from a research can be correctly used and interpreted in such a way that stakeholders of the study are able to make informed
ADVANTATGES OF RESEARCH TRIANGULATION
2022
Research triangulation is a paramount approach that has indisputable advantages in the struggle of producing valid, reliable, balanced, and generalizable research results. Thurmond (2001) puts it right that “Many researchers strive to design studies that will not only give a multidimensional perspective of the phenomenon but will also provide rich, unbiased data that can be interpreted with a comfortable degree of assurance”, here credit and gratitude goes to research triangulation approach. However, the research must be aware of where, how and when to apply certain research method mixes and their respective limitations should be identified and addressed for better results.
TRIANGULATION AN ESSENTIAL TOOL TO ENHANCE THE VALIDITY OF A CASE STUDY
Triangulation involves using multiple data sources in an investigation to produce understanding. Triangulation in sociological research is the use of three or more contrasting methods in a study to produce three different sets or even types of data. Its purpose is to reduce the weight given to any individual set of results. 'Triangulation' can also be achieved by using different research techniques. Triangulated techniques are helpful for cross-checking and used to provide confirmation and completeness, which brings 'balance' between two or more different types of research. The purpose is to increase the credibility and validity of the results. Often this purpose in specific contexts is to obtain confirmation of findings through convergence of different perspectives. There are various types of triangulation which can be done at various stage of the research. It has got lot of relevance in case study as it is believed that its lacks in objectivity.Case studies has various advantages, in that they present data of real-life situations and they provide better insights into the detailed behaviors of the subjects of interest, they are also criticized for their inability to generalize their results. Thus triangulation can help to overcome its disadvantages. It helps to increase its construct validity
Tshidi M Wyllie, 2019
There controversies surrounding Triangulation as an approach to research, despite the controversial debates that have been ongoing for decades pertaining to the qualitative-quantitative dichotomy; multi-method and/or mixed method or triangulation as some researchers choose to call it. The debate mostly surround the issue of whether or not to triangulate research methods, data, strategies and/or approaches. As long as learning is a continued process and evolves with time, and is as diverse as are researchers and scholars in different fields of study, the debate is bound to equally become complex and possibly still continue. However, this paper however chooses not to pursue the controversies but rather to focus on the power and/or the benefits of triangulation.
Commentary—After Triangulation, What Next?
Journal of Mixed Methods Research
This commentary agrees with the editors’ recent decision to do away with triangulation as a term in mixed methods research, but before doing so, it argues for a review of its original popularity, and a careful consideration of what should replace it. Triangulation depends on the comparison of results from qualitative and quantitative studies that attempt to answer the same research question(s), so there are three possible outcomes: convergence, complementarity, and divergence. After reviewing each of these alternatives, I present an approach that cross-tabulates tests of hypotheses as quantitative results and themes as qualitative results, based on the extent to which those results are convergent, complementary, or divergent.