scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Credibility

About: Credibility is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 13730 publications have been published within this topic receiving 331944 citations. The topic is also known as: believability & plausibility.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that it is the responsibility of research methods teachers to ensure that this or a comparable model for ensuring trustworthiness is followed by students undertaking a qualitative inquiry.
Abstract: Although many critics are reluctant to accept the trustworthiness of qualitative research, frameworks for ensuring rigour in this form of work have been in existence for many years. Guba’s constructs, in particular, have won considerable favour and form the focus of this paper. Here researchers seek to satisfy four criteria. In addressing credibility, investigators attempt to demonstrate that a true picture of the phenomenon under scrutiny is being presented. To allow transferability, they provide sufficient detail of the context of the fieldwork for a reader to be able to decide whether the prevailing environment is similar to another situation with which he or she is familiar and whether the findings can justifiably be applied to the other setting. The meeting of the dependability criterion is difficult in qualitative work, although researchers should at least strive to enable a future investigator to repeat the study. Finally, to achieve confirmability, researchers must take steps to demonstrate that findings emerge from the data and not their own predispositions. The paper concludes by suggesting that it is the responsibility of research methods teachers to ensure that this or a comparable model for ensuring trustworthiness is followed by students undertaking a qualitative inquiry.

8,980 citations

01 Jan 2005

4,663 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: This overview examines ways of enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis by dealing with three distinct but related inquiry concerns: rigorous techniques and methods for gathering and analyzing qualitative data; the credibility, competence, and perceived trustworthiness of the qualitative researcher; and the philosophical beliefs of evaluation users about such paradigm-based preferences.
Abstract: Varying philosophical and theoretical orientations to qualitative inquiry remind us that issues of quality and credibility intersect with audience and intended research purposes. This overview examines ways of enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis by dealing with three distinct but related inquiry concerns: rigorous techniques and methods for gathering and analyzing qualitative data, including attention to validity, reliability, and triangulation; the credibility, competence, and perceived trustworthiness of the qualitative researcher; and the philosophical beliefs of evaluation users about such paradigm-based preferences as objectivity versus subjectivity, truth versus perspective, and generalizations versus extrapolations. Although this overview examines some general approaches to issues of credibility and data quality in qualitative analysis, it is important to acknowledge that particular philosophical underpinnings, specific paradigms, and special purposes for qualitative inquiry will typically include additional or substitute criteria for assuring and judging quality, validity, and credibility. Moreover, the context for these considerations has evolved. In early literature on evaluation methods the debate between qualitative and quantitative methodologists was often strident. In recent years the debate has softened. A consensus has gradually emerged that the important challenge is to match appropriately the methods to empirical questions and issues, and not to universally advocate any single methodological approach for all problems.

3,691 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This description of qualitative content analysis offers one approach that shows how the general principles of the method can be used and four distinct main stages are described: the decontextualisation, the recontextualization, the categorization, and the compilation.

2,368 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
28 Mar 2011
TL;DR: There are measurable differences in the way messages propagate, that can be used to classify them automatically as credible or not credible, with precision and recall in the range of 70% to 80%.
Abstract: We analyze the information credibility of news propagated through Twitter, a popular microblogging service. Previous research has shown that most of the messages posted on Twitter are truthful, but the service is also used to spread misinformation and false rumors, often unintentionally.On this paper we focus on automatic methods for assessing the credibility of a given set of tweets. Specifically, we analyze microblog postings related to "trending" topics, and classify them as credible or not credible, based on features extracted from them. We use features from users' posting and re-posting ("re-tweeting") behavior, from the text of the posts, and from citations to external sources.We evaluate our methods using a significant number of human assessments about the credibility of items on a recent sample of Twitter postings. Our results shows that there are measurable differences in the way messages propagate, that can be used to classify them automatically as credible or not credible, with precision and recall in the range of 70% to 80%.

2,123 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Empirical research
51.3K papers, 1.9M citations
88% related
Government
141K papers, 1.9M citations
87% related
The Internet
213.2K papers, 3.8M citations
86% related
Corporate governance
118.5K papers, 2.7M citations
81% related
Politics
263.7K papers, 5.3M citations
81% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20231,881
20223,791
2021775
2020830
2019822
2018735