Reliability in qualitative studies is mostly a matter of “being thorough, careful and honest in carrying out the research” (Robson, 2002: 176). Things are slightly different, however, in Qualitative research. In Quantitative research, reliability refers to consistency of certain measurements, and validity – to whether these measurements “measure what they are supposed to measure”. Reliability is determined by tests and internal consistency, while validity has four types, which are the conclusion, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity.What is Validity and Reliability in Qualitative research? Reliability is easier to determine, because validity has more analysis just to know how valid a thing is. Reliability is more on the consistency of a measurement, while validity is focused more on how strong the outcome of the program was. These are some of the differences between reliability and validity.
![concepts of validity and reliability concepts of validity and reliability](https://study.com/cimages/videopreview/videopreview-full/_test-retest-reliability-coefficient-examples-concept_111249.jpg)
External validity is focused more on the general concept of the outcome. Construct validity analyzes how strong the outcome is. Internal validity is more on asking what kind of relationship is there between the outcome and the program. The conclusion validity is focused more on the relationship between the outcome and the program. Validity is categorized into four types, the conclusion, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. It answers the question ‘are we right?’ This means if there is a social experiment on a class concerning discipline and then after the experiment the class became more disciplined, then the strength of the conclusion is very strong. If reliability is more on consistency, validity is more on how strong the outcomes of the hypothesis are. With this it will be easier to distinguish the two from each other. In this way, the confusion between the two terms may be fixed. Now to differentiate it with validity, it is best to define validity as well. And even if different people answered these different questions, but still came out with the right thought, then it must be reliable. Let this be answered by different people or different groups. Make different sets of question that can measure the same factor.
![concepts of validity and reliability concepts of validity and reliability](https://i1.rgstatic.net/publication/347767004_Validity_and_Reliability/links/604be70992851c2b23c56d62/largepreview.png)
The next way in estimating reliability is internal consistency.
![concepts of validity and reliability concepts of validity and reliability](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d6/27/7a/d6277abc1f1af3a806a880bc8e3753cb.jpg)
![concepts of validity and reliability concepts of validity and reliability](https://schoolbag.info/physics/physics_math/physics_math.files/image779.jpg)
Then, if the results of the two tests are the same, it means that certain measurement is reliable. It must be measured twice in different times, then compare the similarities of the results of the two tests. You simply test an idea twice, test 1 and test 2. The first way is the test or retest and the other is the internal consistency. There are two ways in estimating whether a certain thing is reliable or not. It means if you are using a certain kind of instrument for a test and the results on the subjects you are testing is the same for the first and second try, then it is considered reliable. Reliability is when your measurement is consistent. So to avoid confusion, here are the differences of the two. These terms are often used on scholastic outputs such as thesis studies, term papers, research papers, and the likes. They are actually different things, different terms when they are explained in a technical manner. Reliability and validity seem to be synonymous, but they do not mean the same thing.