UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statement C is the only wrong statement because selecting analysis procedures solely after seeing interesting results encourages data dredging and increases the risk of biased conclusions. Statements A and B correctly stress that analysis planning should precede data collection, and D recognises the role of software in managing and analysing data. Statement E is also true, as qualitative researchers often plan coding approaches even while allowing for emergent categories.

Option A:
Option A is correct as it isolates C as the statement that conflicts with principles of research rigour and transparency. It endorses careful advance planning for both quantitative and qualitative analysis while accepting that some flexibility may remain.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it adds A to the wrong set, implying that preparing an analysis plan before data collection is undesirable. This goes against standard methodological advice that planning supports coherence between questions, data and analysis.

Option C:
Option C is also wrong because it includes D as a wrong statement, even though the use of software tools for data handling and analysis is common and appropriate. Labeling D as wrong underestimates the role of such tools in modern research.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it misclassifies B and E along with C. Both B and E correctly describe thoughtful preparation for quantitative and qualitative analysis, and including them as wrong statements contradicts accepted practice.

Inter-coder reliability assesses the extent to which independent coders agree on how to classify units of content into categories. High agreement suggests that the coding scheme is clear and that results are not heavily dependent on a single coder’s subjective judgment. It is crucial for ensuring the credibility of content analysis findings. Thus, agreement among coders is referred to as inter-coder reliability.

Option A:
Test–retest reliability examines the stability of scores over time by administering the same instrument twice to the same respondents. It does not assess agreement between different coders at one point in time. Therefore, it is not the correct term here.

Option B:
Option B, inter-coder reliability, focuses specifically on consistency across observers or coders who apply the same coding rules. It is often quantified using statistics such as Cohen’s kappa. Because the stem mentions different coders assigning the same categories, this option is correct.

Option C:
Internal reliability, often assessed by Cronbach’s alpha, looks at consistency among items within a scale. It concerns item intercorrelations rather than coder agreement, so it does not fit the description.

Option D:
Split-half reliability evaluates the consistency of scores on two halves of a test or instrument. It is another form of internal consistency but not a measure of agreement among coders. Hence, it is not appropriate here.