Patton uses the term “preponderance of evidence” to describe the “best fit” between the data a researcher gathers and the patterns and conclusions he or she draws (as quoted by Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 249). This is a term borrowed from courtroom procedure, where it is the standard of proof used in noncriminal cases. In the legal context, a judge or jury must find that a given fact is proven if, based on the evidence provided. it is more likely than not (or to “>50% likely”) to be true. In your opinion, is this an appropriate standard for the validation of qualitative research? Why or why not? (Make sure to use appropriate support for your position).