Trustworthiness (rigour) and Verification (validity): Qualitative Paradigm


For the qualitative data analysis, we will assess the trustworthiness of our findings, focusing on credibility and dependability [Sandelowski]. The study’s credibility will be ensured by reflexivity and respondent validation. The study audit trail which will document the evolution of coding and analysis; recording coding decisions will ensure the dependability of the study [Rodgers]. The study audit trail will also explicitly state the backgrounds, perceptions, known biases and relationship of the researchers to the study. Having data collection and analysis occur simultaneously will allow for the corroboration of new themes and insights identified during analysis.

Rigour will also be achieved through the use of 2 coders and coding consensus meetings. During the coding consensus meetings, the principal investigator and qualitative investigator will look for other plausible ways of organizing the data and also search for negative cases - that is, cases that don’t fit the identified categories [Patton]. As well, all categories will be firmly grounded in the data by identifying sections of the transcripts from which they originated [Koch] and quotes will be used to illustrate the codes, which will further demonstrate a good fit between the interview data and the analytic results.

Finally, we will triangulate findings by member-checking (sharing provisional results) among team members as the project unfolds, and with selected ICU staff at the end of the project.