Discussion for SRQR item: Techniques to enhance trustworthiness

Techniques to enhance trustworthiness

Describe methods used to ensure trustworthiness and credibility throughout the data collection and analysis process. (See footnote on commonly used techniques1).

Explain your choice of techniques and why these are appropriate for the particular study.

Jump to:

Why readers need this information

This information helps readers know what decisions the researchers made and why so the reader can 1) consider the relevance to their context and the resonance with their own experience or observations (or lack of resonance and why that might be) and 2) evaluate or critically appraise the manuscript.

Examples

Member checking

Member checks [REF] with an external TBL expert (R.L.) supported the validity of these analyses.

Triangulation of data types and data sources

The interview data were triangulated with the data of 11 student and supervisor focus groups of a previous study, and more specifically, with those data that concern in particular the influence of CST [Communication Skills Training] on the development of patient-centredness…. Triangulation with the focus group data allowed us to broaden the in-depth information from the interviews in the analysis and to ‘share and compare’ this with information from students and doctors with varying levels of CST (no, limited, full programme) and from two universities (Universities of Antwerp and Ghent). Moreover, this enabled us to better explore the evolution over time, given that the focus groups included participants at different stages of their study: before clerkships (year 4, undergraduate), during clerkships (year 6, undergraduate), after clerkships (year 7, undergraduate) and postgraduate (general practice trainees, and supervising specialists and GPs; Table 1).

Finally, as a test of ‘goodness-of-fit’, we carefully reviewed the videotapes for any ‘deviant’ cases that did not fit the categories we had developed.

Triangulation of Researchers + Audit trail

To ensure rigor and increase authenticity in our methodology, we used two kinds of triangulation—investigator triangulation and data triangulation.[REF] We sought analytical rigor using an audit trail and multiple coders; our coding team included an experienced clinician (M.G.) as well as a nonclinician with expertise in medical communication and team dynamics (L.L.).

Training and resources

See Lincoln and Guba’s Evaluative Criteria for trustworthiness.

Back to top

Footnotes

  1. Techniques to enhance trustworthiness will depend on the paradigm, approach, and/or methods used. Commonly used techniques include: member checking; triangulation of data sources, methods, and/or researchers; creation of an explicit audit trail; and immersion in the site of data collection for an extended period of time (especially for research in which an observer’s presence is likely to disrupt the phenomenon under investigation). Member checking involves sharing findings, such as descriptions of key phenomena, themes, or an explanatory model, with participants and asking them to verify the accuracy or resonance with their perspectives. Triangulation involves using more than one data source, method, or researcher to add diverse perspectives on the findings of the study and, in some approaches, to test the transferability or generalizability of a model. An audit trail involves careful documentation of all decisions made throughout the study, from initial conceptualization to study design, sampling, analysis, and reporting, to provide transparency and to enable an external researcher to review all the steps involved in the study.↩︎