Appraising the trustworthiness of qualitative studies : Guidelines for occupational therapists.

605 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Avoiding Traps in Member Checking (2010, positive): “This indicates reflexivity, that is, the recognition by researchers that they have “a significant influence on the development of the research and the engagement of the participants” (Curtin & Fossey, 2007, pp. 92-93) and that they have a duty to be transparent about that influence.”
Sink or swim: Adversity- and growth-related experiences in Olympic swimming champions (2015, methodology): “…287 trustworthiness is member-checking which is a “way of finding out whether the data analysis is 288 congruent with the participants’ experiences” (Curtin & Fossey, 2007, p. 92) and has been used 289 previously in IPA studies in sport psychology research (e.g., Hassell, Sabiston, & Bloom,…”
Food and tourism: an effective partnership? A UK-based review (2013, methodology): “Completeness “offers depth and breadth leading to a greater understanding of the phenomenon as each research strategy used contributes a different piece to the puzzle” (Curtin & Fossey, 2007, p. 90).”