Validity criteria are fundamental elements that make up the methodological rigor of a scientific study. Thus, this study aimed to examine the validity criteria used in scientific studies in the area of strategy, published in the Annals of EnAnpad between 1997 and 2010. In the literature review, the theoretical approach to validity criteria is that of Selltiz, Wrightsman and Cook (1987), Straub and Carlson (1989), Cooper and Schindler (2003), Babbie (2005), Hair Jr., Anderson, Tatham and Black (2005), Yin (2005), Brewer and Hunter (2006) and Malhotra (2006). From the literature review, aiming to expand the adoption of validity criteria, items are proposed so that can help researchers to determine the adequacy of their studies to the main criteria. We performed a literature and bibliometric analysis of 53 articles in the field of strategy and content analysis was made of the theoretical articles; data were submitted to descriptive analysis of frequency and percentual use of validation as of the type of research (quantitative, qualitative and the two approaches mixed), the types of validation criteria employed, and the most cited works in addressing validation. It was found that the convergent, discriminant, content and construct validities were the most employed criteria in the studies reviewed and criterion validity (criterion validity, concurrent and predictive), although widely discussed in the literature, was used in less 10% of these studies. Among the results, even if it has, in the area of strategy, conducted surveys that show concern for validation, that number is still small considering the number of articles published in the field, in the period analyzed. So, there is room for exploring other validity criteria, such as criteria validation. This study can contribute, through the dissemination and guidance regarding the main validity criteria, so that research can adopt procedures aimed at validating research instruments.
Quality; Validity criteria; Strategy; Scientific papers; Bibliometric
