Confirmability

In qualitative research, the actions and perceptions of participants are analyzed for their expressions of meaning within a given context. Consistent with the practices of the selected qualitative methodology used, the researcher then interprets the participant expressions through a coding or meaning-making process. In this coding process, the researcher is looking for messages that are consistent with, confirm, or expand on current knowledge and theory. From these insights, the researcher is then able to make statements about the context under study. In so doing, additional processes must be incorporated into the research design that verifies the truthfulness or meaning being asserted in the study. This is called confirmability.

Confirmability is often equated with reliability and objectivity in quantitative research. Reliability and objectivity are measures of the accuracy of the truth or meaning being expressed in the study. The epistemological function of this process is to suggest that truth and meaning are reliable only to the point where they can be verified as more than just a singular event peculiar to that specific research endeavor and researcher. This is essential because it is an academic process that moves the research beyond a one-time event into a framework where meaning and truth can be used to build on, expand, or create theory.

Confirmability is an accurate means through which to verify the two basic goals of qualitative research: (1) to understand a phenomenon from the perspective of the research participants and (2) to understand the meanings people give to their experiences. Confirmability is concerned with providing evidence that the researcher's interpretations of participants' constructions are rooted in the participants' constructions and also that data analysis and the resulting findings and conclusions can be verified as reflective of and grounded in the participants' perceptions. In essence, confirmability can be expressed as the degree to which the results of the study are based on the research purpose and not altered due to researcher bias.

Although confirmability does not deny that each researcher will bring a unique perspective to the study, it requires that the researcher account for any biases by being up front and open about them and use the appropriate qualitative methodological practices to respond to those biases. For example, a researcher using discourse analysis can have multiple coders of the same data to establish a measure of the consistency in the coding of themes. The researcher can also make the research process as transparent as possible by clearly describing how data were collected and analyzed and possibly offering examples of the coding process in the final document. Confirmability can also be expressed through an audit trail where an independent reviewer is allowed to verify the research process and interpretations of the data as consistent on both the literature and methodological levels. Selected participants can also be asked to review some of the coding and meaning-making process to determine whether the researcher's interpretations are consistent with their perceptions.