Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research?
Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/14780887.2016.1219435
复制
发表时间：
2017-01-01
影响因子：
19
通讯作者：
Thomas, David R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Thomas, David R.
人们通常认为，使用所谓的“成员检查”可以提高定性研究的可信度。回顾了提及成员检查的已发表文献，以确定从研究参与者那里寻求反馈的目的和程序，以及成员检查报告的结果。确定了四个主题，反映了对成员检查有影响的研究目的的潜在假设：理论概括、代表性、参与和变化。成员检查不太可能与专注于理论发展和概括的研究相关。对于其他类型的研究，成员检查可能是合理的，但几乎没有证据表明成员检查改善了研究结果。在不能保证匿名的情况下，成员检查可以用于获得参与者批准使用报价或案例研究。在评估中，利益相关者对报告草案的审查可以被视为良好的研究实践。在参与性或合作性研究中，持续的联系可能包括成员检查。
It is often assumed that use of so-called "member checks" improves the credibility of qualitative research. Published literature mentioning member checks was reviewed to identify the purposes and procedures for seeking feedback from research participants as well as outcomes reported from member checks. Four themes reflecting underlying assumptions about the purposes of research that have implications for member checks were identified: theory generalisation, representation, participation, and change. Member checks are unlikely to be relevant to research focussed on theory development and generalisation. For other types of research, member checks might be justifiable, but there was little evidence that member checks improved research findings. Member checks can be useful for obtaining participant approval for using quotations or case studies and where anonymity cannot be guaranteed. In evaluation, stakeholder reviews of draft reports can be seen as good research practice. In participatory or collaborative research, ongoing contact might include member checks.