A briefing on qualitative and quantitative research method criteria: for Housing Studies students

A briefing on qualitative and quantitative research method criteria: for Housing Studies students (information from perplexity.ai)

My question 1: "Please briefly introduce the major research method quality criteria (both quantitative and qualitative ones, e.g. internal and external validity) in the context of Housing Studies dissertation projects. Probably, provide 4 quality criteria for quantitative research methods and 4 for qualitative research methods."

The reply: "Major quality criteria in quantitative and qualitative methods overlap conceptually but use different labels and techniques. In Housing Studies, they guide how convincingly a dissertation links methods, data, and conclusions to real housing problems and contexts.

Quantitative criteria

Internal validity

Internal validity concerns whether the study can justify a causal or explanatory relationship between variables, such as the effect of housing subsidy level on affordability stress or overcrowding. It is strengthened by clear research design (e.g. longitudinal or quasi‑experimental designs), careful control or measurement of confounders (e.g. income, household size, neighbourhood characteristics), and consistent operationalisation of key constructs such as “affordability” or “housing quality”.​

External validity

External validity is about the extent to which the findings from a sample of households, estates, or neighbourhoods can be generalised to a broader housing population. It depends on sampling strategy (e.g. probability or stratified sampling across housing types and districts), response rates and non‑response analysis, and whether the study context (policy regime, market conditions) is sufficiently described for readers to judge generalisability to other cities or time periods.​

Reliability

Reliability refers to the consistency and stability of measurement instruments across time, items, and researchers, for example repeated use of a housing satisfaction scale or overcrowding index. In Housing Studies dissertations this is supported through clear item wording, piloting questionnaires, reporting internal consistency statistics for composite indices, and using transparent data‑cleaning and coding procedures so that another researcher could reproduce the same quantitative dataset.​

Objectivity

Objectivity requires that findings reflect the housing phenomena rather than the researcher’s expectations or values, even where the researcher has professional or activist engagement with housing issues. In quantitative work this is supported by pre‑specifying models, using standardized coding rules, separating normative discussion from empirical analysis, and making analytic decisions (e.g. variable selection, handling of outliers) explicit so that other researchers could reach similar numerical results from the same data.​

Qualitative criteria

Credibility

Credibility is the analogue of internal validity and concerns how believable the interpretation is to knowledgeable readers and to participants, for instance when analysing tenant narratives about displacement, crowding, or estate renewal. It is strengthened through prolonged engagement in the field, careful use of semi‑structured interviews or observations, systematic coding procedures, triangulation across data sources (e.g. tenants, officials, documents), and techniques such as member checking where appropriate.​

Transferability

Transferability parallels external validity and asks whether insights from a specific case (e.g. one public housing estate, one co‑housing project, or one informal settlement) can sensibly inform understanding in other, similar housing contexts. Qualitative Housing Studies dissertations address this by providing “thick description” of setting, policy environment, and participant characteristics so that readers can decide whether lessons might apply to other estates, cities, or tenure arrangements.​

Dependability

Dependability corresponds to reliability and focuses on the stability and consistency of the qualitative process over time, such as how interview guides, coding schemes, and analytic decisions evolve across a study of residents’ relocation experiences. It is enhanced by keeping an audit trail (versioned interview guides, coding frameworks, memos), documenting changes in sampling or focus, and using procedures like double‑coding or team discussion to check consistency in theme development.​

Confirmability

Confirmability parallels objectivity and assesses the extent to which findings are grounded in the data rather than in the researcher’s prior beliefs about housing policy, marketisation, or inequality. In practice this involves reflexive journaling about the researcher’s position (e.g. planner, social worker, tenant), systematic linking of interpretations to specific excerpts, and openness to disconfirming cases (e.g. residents who experience an estate renewal positively when the researcher expected only negative effects)."

My question 2: "Please suggest two YouTube videos that introduce research method quality criteria."

The reply: "Two concise, accessible options that fit well with dissertation‑level work are:

1. “Internal and External Validity (Simply Explained)” – Shribe
   URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=942IYsg3EnA
   This video clearly explains overall validity, then focuses on internal and external validity with intuitive examples, and briefly notes how these ideas relate to qualitative research.​

2. “Trustworthiness in Qualitative Studies: Credibility, Transferability, Dependability & Confirmability” – Grad Coach
   URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsvTS_Y_I20
   This one introduces the four classic trustworthiness criteria in qualitative research, with a clear structure and timestamps that make it easy to revisit specific criteria while writing a dissertation."

A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.