RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN
4.8 Reliability
Reliability refers to consistency and is therefore concerned with the robustness of the questionnaire (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2012). In other words, whether it will produce consistent findings at different times and under different conditions such as in the case of different samples or interviewers. The researcher ensured that reliability was achieved by ensuring that at
words, reliability is revealed by the tendency of a study, experiment, test or any measuring procedure to result in the same outcomes on different repeated trials. Four broad categories of reliability estimation in research have been identified, with each of the estimating the degree of reliability in a uniquely. These are:
Test-retest reliability-mainly used in assessing the consistency of a measure from one period to the other.
Parallel-forms reliability-useful in assessing the consistency of the outcomes of the results of two tests developed similarly from the same content domain.
Interpreter or inter-observer reliability-useful in assessing the degree to which different observers provide a consistent estimation of the same phenomenon.
Internal consistency reliability-useful in assessing the consistency of outcomes across variables within a test.
4.8.1 Instrument Reliability for the Research Study
In ensuring that the reliability of the research instrument was maintained, a pilot study was conducted for both the quantitative research design and qualitative research design. A pilot study has two different uses in social science research; as it can be used to refer to the feasibility studies that are ‘small-scale version(s) and also trial run(s) that are normally done in preparation of the main study (Polit et al., 2001). According to Baker (1994), a pilot study is the trying out or pretesting of a research instrument to be used for the major study. A pilot study has some merits in that it indicates the key areas of the main research project that could be unsuccessful or complicated therefore doing a pilot study ensures that the researcher reduces the risk (De Vaus, 1993).
A pilot study was important for this study since it helped the researcher in the process of judging the reliability of the instruments through estimation of the degree to which the variables reflected the same construct obtained in similar results. To ensure minimisation of risk, the reliability of the final structured questionnaire was calculated using the Cronbach Alpha coefficients, which measures internal consistency among a set of variables by assessing the extent to which the same set of respondents provide similar consistent responses to similar items (Diamantopoulus and Schlegelmilch, 1997). Through computation, the calculated Cronbach Alpha for this research was on average above 0.7 and deemed acceptable (Field, 2009).
4.8.2 Validity
Validity implies research study, its parts and the conclusions thereof and application based on it can be of high or low quality and/or in between. Validity pertains to the integrity of the conclusions that are generated from research. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2012), refer to the ability of the questionnaire to measure what the researcher intends it to measure in any research.
It is sometimes called measurement validity, as it concerns that what the researcher finds with the questionnaire representing the reality of what the researcher is measuring.
Blumberg, Cooper and Schindler (2008), argue that when discussing the validity of a questionnaire, researchers often refer to content validity, criterion-related validity and construct validity. Content validity is the extent to which the measurement device, in this case, the measurement questions in the questionnaire provides enough coverage of the investigate questions. The researcher ensured that enough/adequate coverage was achieved through careful definition of the research in the literature review and prior discussion with experts in the field especially from the Ministry of Small-to-medium Enterprises and Co-operative Development. In this case, the study, findings by the researcher were genuine after due consideration of all the participants to be involved, and their data and usage of the right sampling strategies and the fact that findings were not based on a few subjectively chosen respondents solved the problem of anecdotalism (Silverman, 2004). To limit the anecdotal problem, various methods were used by the researcher as explained in the earlier sections and data triangulation was also used.
The validity of the research instrument was also largely determined by seeking expert advice from the statistician and the supervisor who thoroughly assessed the extent to which the instrument represented and connected logically to the underlying theory, research objectives and the phenomena under study.
To ensure generalisability of the research findings the research sampling design for this research was logically developed, and some other important details in the data collection methods were meticulously followed.
Validity or trustworthiness if maximised in a research implies that more credible and defensible results may lead to generalisability (Golafashani as cited by Bashir, Aftal and Azeem, 2008). The quality of research is to a large extent related to the possibility of generalisability of the results and thereby to testing and increasing the validity of the given research.
Ruddin (2006) argues that case study research need not only make a claim about the generalisability of their research findings but what is crucial is the use by other researchers and the art of feeding into the process of naturalistic generalisation.