You're touching upon the trustworthiness criteria used to evaluate qualitative research. Unlike quantitative research, which is judged by validity, reliability, generalizability, and objectivity (the "pure scientific terms"), qualitative research requires a different evaluative matrix.

Here’s a structured explanation in Notion-compatible format:

Evaluating Interpretative (Qualitative) Findings

🔹 Why not on pure scientific terms?

• Qualitative research deals with meanings, interpretations, and lived experiences.
• Reality is seen as socially constructed and context-bound, not universal.
• Therefore, applying strict positivist standards (validity, reliability, generalizability) may undermine the richness and depth of insights.

Alternative Criteria: Trustworthiness

1. Credibility (parallel to validity)

• Ensures findings are believable from the perspective of participants.
• Techniques: prolonged engagement, triangulation, member-checking.
• Example: Research on farmer suicides where researchers validate interpretations by discussing them with affected families.

2. Dependability (parallel to reliability)

• Focuses on the stability of findings over time and across conditions.
• Requires an audit trail documenting how data were collected, coded, and analyzed.
• Example: Repeating interviews in different seasons to see if coping strategies of migrants remain consistent.

3. Confirmability (parallel to objectivity)

• Ensures findings are shaped by participants and not researcher bias.