方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 成员核查(Member Checking)与参与者验证× | 可信度标准在定性研究中的应用× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 质性研究 | 质性研究 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份 | 1985 | 1985 |
| 提出者 | Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba | Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba |
| 类型≠ | Method | Framework |
| 开创性文献 | Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications. ISBN: 978-0803924314 | Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications. ISBN: 978-0803924314 |
| 别名≠ | member validation, respondent validation, participant feedback, credibility check | trustworthiness criteria, credibility, dependability, confirmability |
| 相关 | 4 | 4 |
| 摘要≠ | Member checking is a quality assurance procedure in qualitative research in which the researcher shares preliminary findings, interpretations, or analytical themes with research participants and asks whether the findings accurately reflect their perspectives and experiences. Developed by Lincoln and Guba (1985) as a trustworthiness criterion, member checking is considered a key method for ensuring credibility and reducing researcher misinterpretation. The goal is to verify that the researcher has understood participants correctly and that interpretations are grounded in participants' actual meaning-making, not the researcher's assumptions. Member checking can occur at different points in research (after individual interviews, after initial analysis, or after draft findings are written) and take different forms (individual feedback, group validation, interactive discussion). | Trustworthiness is a framework for evaluating the quality and rigor of qualitative research, developed by Lincoln and Guba (1985) as an alternative to quantitative criteria (internal validity, external validity, reliability, objectivity). The framework comprises five criteria: credibility (findings are accurate and grounded in data), transferability (findings apply to other contexts), dependability (findings are consistent and defensible), confirmability (findings reflect the data and participants' perspectives, not researcher bias), and authenticity (research reflects diverse viewpoints and promotes understanding). This framework has become standard for assessing qualitative research across disciplines and guides researchers in designing and reporting rigorous qualitative studies. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|