data confirmation, modification Need to re-consent present (Birt, 2010; and verification of the participant Coercion as it Koelsch, 2013; interpretation might be hard to Additional cost for Harvey, 2015) Could enable the addition of disagree with further transcribing new data researcher’s and time to analysis interpretation in Need to undertake further Losing participants to their presence analysis of member check follow-up interview Participants can veto illustrative Participants might agree on quotes which potential illustrative might expose quotations their identity in Does not enhance the small research trustworthiness of the whole environments data set as researcher still needs to combine data set Member check Interpretive Focus group might include Need to have Data needs to focus group participants or others with undertaken sufficient be (Klinger, 2005) similar experiences analysis to prepare Participants might feel their data for sharing. Group coercion experiences are validated can make it Need to re-consent and others have the same difficult for people for experience single confidentiality of Group might move from a disconfirming original data and discussion group to one of voice understanding how support Coercion as it new data will be used Can confirm or disaffirm might be hard Cost of venue and results to disagree further transcribing Group might generate new with the of the focus group. data which has been researcher if Not as convenient for constructed in different they are participant if they social setting (i.e. group leading the have to travel to rather an individual) focus group venue Member check Positivist if simply for Themes are returned so Need to do analysis Less risk of using confirming results. can make claims about the increasing time before participant synthesised trustworthiness of findings. the themes can be distress as the analysed data (1) Constructionist if The participant should be returned themes are (Harvey, 2015) opportunity to able to recognise their own Have to consider the synthesised comment and add data experiences within the length and language of and as in Synthesised synthesised themes. the document to conceptualised. Member Checking engage participants in Need to If seeking additive data conceptual themes confirm need to provide participants explanation and space for Need to check contact participants to engage with able and willing details if several this. to receive the months after the document if If several participants do interview several months not return limits claims on Losing participants to have elapsed trustworthiness of final data follow-up set
data (Birt, 2010; Koelsch, 2013; Harvey, 2015) confirmation, modification and verification of interpretation Could enable the addition of new data Need to undertake further analysis of member check interview Participants might agree on potential illustrative quotations Does not enhance the trustworthiness of the whole data set as researcher still needs to combine data set Need to re-consent the participant Additional cost for further transcribing and time to analysis Losing participants to follow-up present Coercion as it might be hard to disagree with researcher’s interpretation in their presence Participants can veto illustrative quotes which might expose their identity in small research environments Member check focus group (Klinger, 2005) Interpretive Focus group might include participants or others with similar experiences Participants might feel their experiences are validated and others have the same experience Group might move from a discussion group to one of support Can confirm or disaffirm results Group might generate new data which has been constructed in different social setting (i.e. group rather an individual) Need to have undertaken sufficient analysis to prepare data for sharing. Need to re-consent people for confidentiality of original data and understanding how new data will be used Cost of venue and further transcribing of the focus group. Not as convenient for participant if they have to travel to venue Data needs to be Group coercion can make it difficult for single disconfirming voice Coercion as it might be hard to disagree with the researcher if they are leading the focus group Member check using synthesised analysed data (1) (Harvey, 2015) Positivist if simply for confirming results. Constructionist if opportunity to comment and add data as in Synthesised Member Checking Themes are returned so can make claims about the trustworthiness of findings. The participant should be able to recognise their own experiences within the synthesised themes. If seeking additive data need to provide explanation and space for participants to engage with this. If several participants do not return limits claims on trustworthiness of final data set Need to do analysis increasing time before the themes can be returned Have to consider the length and language of the document to engage participants in conceptual themes Need to check contact details if several months after the interview Losing participants to follow-up Less risk of participant distress as the themes are synthesised and conceptualised. Need to confirm participants able and willing to receive the document if several months have elapsed