Validation in dialogical research by triangulation – Examples from projects on life-span development

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68081740%3A_____%2F21%3A00549051" target="_blank" >RIV/68081740:_____/21:00549051 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://71894e24-127e-407d-bb5e-4643e7390434.filesusr.com/ugd/b1ca12_4e219659a1094f4eaa06f99bca807d68.pdf" target="_blank" >https://71894e24-127e-407d-bb5e-4643e7390434.filesusr.com/ugd/b1ca12_4e219659a1094f4eaa06f99bca807d68.pdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Validation in dialogical research by triangulation – Examples from projects on life-span development

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Researchers and practitioners familiar with the theory of dialogical self routinely derive their claims about the nature and structure of internal dialogue from an analysis of one kind of data (typically narrative data). To validate these claims in a systematic research, it is reasonable to adopt the strategy of triangulation - to compare conclusions based on an analysis of data of a certain kind with independent parallel analyses of data of different kinds. In this paper, we discuss a utilization of data from conventional self-report scales for triangulation of findings of dialogical narrative analysis. We propose that i) it is possible to assess internal dialogue indirectly by scales of various types of reminiscence activities, scores on these scales are proxy measures of adaptive or non-adaptive types of interactions among I-positions, ii) it is possible to focus on a consistence or inconsistence of self-report ratings, in contrast to a common approach that averages inconsistent extreme ratings and yields medium score on a given scale, from the dialogical point of view the inconsistent ratings may indicate highly differentiated I-positions in respondent’s internal dialogue. We show how these alternative ways of assessment of internal dialogue may be used for triangulation and validation of narrative analyses by presenting examples from projects on midlife and older adulthood. In both projects, we focus on dialogical processes that individuals employ in their struggling with challenges related to certain age (e.g., midlife crisis in midlife, creating a meaningful life story in older adult-hood). In the first place, we use narrative analyses of interviews to identify structures of internal dialogue that facilite a resolution of an age-related challenge or that prevent from it. At the same time, we confront the narrative analyses with proxy measures derived from self-report scales such as Reminiscence Function Scale, Brief Resiliency Scale or Ego-Integrity nScale. We argue that a convergence among the different assessments of internal dialogue is always non-trivial and makes the research findings more valid and convincing.n

Název v anglickém jazyce

Validation in dialogical research by triangulation – Examples from projects on life-span development

Popis výsledku anglicky

Researchers and practitioners familiar with the theory of dialogical self routinely derive their claims about the nature and structure of internal dialogue from an analysis of one kind of data (typically narrative data). To validate these claims in a systematic research, it is reasonable to adopt the strategy of triangulation - to compare conclusions based on an analysis of data of a certain kind with independent parallel analyses of data of different kinds. In this paper, we discuss a utilization of data from conventional self-report scales for triangulation of findings of dialogical narrative analysis. We propose that i) it is possible to assess internal dialogue indirectly by scales of various types of reminiscence activities, scores on these scales are proxy measures of adaptive or non-adaptive types of interactions among I-positions, ii) it is possible to focus on a consistence or inconsistence of self-report ratings, in contrast to a common approach that averages inconsistent extreme ratings and yields medium score on a given scale, from the dialogical point of view the inconsistent ratings may indicate highly differentiated I-positions in respondent’s internal dialogue. We show how these alternative ways of assessment of internal dialogue may be used for triangulation and validation of narrative analyses by presenting examples from projects on midlife and older adulthood. In both projects, we focus on dialogical processes that individuals employ in their struggling with challenges related to certain age (e.g., midlife crisis in midlife, creating a meaningful life story in older adult-hood). In the first place, we use narrative analyses of interviews to identify structures of internal dialogue that facilite a resolution of an age-related challenge or that prevent from it. At the same time, we confront the narrative analyses with proxy measures derived from self-report scales such as Reminiscence Function Scale, Brief Resiliency Scale or Ego-Integrity nScale. We argue that a convergence among the different assessments of internal dialogue is always non-trivial and makes the research findings more valid and convincing.n

Druh

O - Ostatní výsledky

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50101 - Psychology (including human - machine relations)

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA20-08583S" target="_blank" >GA20-08583S: Krize, prožívání a růst ve středním věku</a><br>

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2021

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů