Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: quality and the idea of qualitative research.

By G. Rolfe. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2006

1,427 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c63e11313b7285c2f0c121d79a663e7eec3d9f6c

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Health Professions

In Sociology and Political Science

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A Review of the Quality Indicators of Rigor in Qualitative Research (2019, background): “execution and reporting of standards of rigor, and the extent to which meaningful contributions to thinking and practice in the field are presented.(13,39) Authors must avoid language heavy with connotations or adjectives that insert the researcher’s opinion into the database or manuscript.”
Rigor in Qualitative Social Work Research: A Review of Strategies Used in Published Articles (2011, methodology): “…work researchers using qualitative methods produce credible work when objectivity is no longer assumed or even pursued (Kincheloe, 2001; Padgett, 2004; Rolfe, 2004)? sometimes referred to as “criteriology,” this question has been a conundrum for qualitative researchers for at least three decades.”
The Research Audit Trail: Methodological Guidance for Application in Practice (2020, background): “Rolfe (2006) states “it behoves researchers to leave a ‘super’ audit trail, recounting not only the rationale underpinning the research decisions taken en route, and the actual course of the research process rather than the idealised version that the reader is usually presented with, but also ……”
Justifying Knowledge, Justifying Method, Taking Action: Epistemologies, Methodologies, and Methods in Qualitative Research (2007, background): “The literature is replete with both kinds of professors, who are thoughtful, productive, and rigorous according to their respective standards (Mantzoukas, 2004; Rolfe, 2006).”
Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. (2013, methodology): “A conscious decision is made to include and code personal memoranda alongside field notes, and the same coding scheme is used for both types of data (Ballinger et al., 2004; Rolfe, 2006).”
Exploring analytical trustworthiness and the process of reaching consensus in interpretative phenomenological analysis: lost in transcription (2015, background): “In addition, we must be explicit in our publications about the processes we have engaged in, and in effect provide our readers with an ‘audit trail’ (Rolfe, 2006, p. 309).”
Member Checking (2016, background): “The study needed to produce results which would have credibility in a clinical environment (Rolfe, 2006); thus, the research design had to “hold its own” in a research world dominated by quantitative clinical research and increasing numbers of mixed method studies (Torrance, 2012).”
Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis (2011, background): “For examples of interesting discussions of some of these topics, see Morrow (2005), Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, and Spiers (2002), and Rolfe (2006).”
Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research (2015, background): “Qualitative research is frequently criticised for lacking scientific rigour with poor justification of the methods adopted, lack of transparency in the analytical procedures and the findings being merely a collection of personal opinions subject to researcher bias.(2) 3 For the novice researcher, de”
Transition shock: the initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated registered nurses. (2009, methodology): “For this final study, I employed a generic qualitative approach to data collection (Sandelowski 2000, Caelli et al. 2003, Rolfe 2006), using a grounded theory process to guide the ongoing analysis and interpretation of the emerging data.”
Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research (2015, background): “[40] reported the practicality of using “conceptual clarity” and “interpretative rigor” as intuitive criteria for assessing quality in meta‐ethnography, which somehow echoed Rolfe’s controversial aesthetic theory of research reports.[41] Food for Thought”