25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research?

      Qualitative Research in Psychology
      Informa UK Limited

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Qualitative and mixed methods provide unique contributions to outcomes research.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments' ability to assess validity in qualitative research.

            The concept of validity has been a central component in critical appraisal exercises evaluating the methodological quality of quantitative studies. Reactions by qualitative researchers have been mixed in relation to whether or not validity should be applied to qualitative research and if so, what criteria should be used to distinguish high-quality articles from others. We compared three online critical appraisal instruments' ability to facilitate an assessment of validity. Many reviewers have used the critical appraisal skills program (CASP) tool to complete their critical appraisal exercise; however, CASP appears to be less sensitive to aspects of validity than the evaluation tool for qualitative studies (ETQS) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool. The ETQS provides detailed instructions on how to interpret criteria; however, it is the JBI tool, with its focus on congruity, that appears to be the most coherent.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Understanding and evaluating qualitative research.

              Qualitative research aims to address questions concerned with developing an understanding of the meaning and experience dimensions of humans' lives and social worlds. Central to good qualitative research is whether the research participants' subjective meanings, actions and social contexts, as understood by them, are illuminated. This paper aims to provide beginning researchers, and those unfamiliar with qualitative research, with an orientation to the principles that inform the evaluation of the design, conduct, findings and interpretation of qualitative research. It orients the reader to two philosophical perspectives, the interpretive and critical research paradigms, which underpin both the qualitative research methodologies most often used in mental health research, and how qualitative research is evaluated. Criteria for evaluating quality are interconnected with standards for ethics in qualitative research. They include principles for good practice in the conduct of qualitative research, and for trustworthiness in the interpretation of qualitative data. The paper reviews these criteria, and discusses how they may be used to evaluate qualitative research presented in research reports. These principles also offer some guidance about the conduct of sound qualitative research for the beginner qualitative researcher.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Qualitative Research in Psychology
                Qualitative Research in Psychology
                Informa UK Limited
                1478-0887
                1478-0895
                August 02 2016
                August 02 2016
                : 14
                : 1
                : 23-41
                Article
                10.1080/14780887.2016.1219435
                bd96912c-24b3-473a-bbd7-cd37d769cf86
                © 2016
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article