Radiography
Volume 16, Issue 1 , Pages 62-67 , February 2010

Establishing rigour in qualitative radiography research

  • F.J. Murphy

      Affiliations

    • School of Healthcare Professions, University of Salford, Salford M6 6PU, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 161 295 6974.
    • ,
  • J. Yielder

      Affiliations

    • Medical Imaging, School of Health Sciences, Unitec, Auckland, New Zealand

Received 3 April 2009 ,Revised 9 July 2009 ,Accepted 15 July 2009.

References 

  1. Roberts PH, Priest M, Traynor R. Reliability and validity in research. Nursing Standard. 2006;20(44):41–45
  2. Long T, Johnson M. Rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research. including commentary by Burnard P with author response. Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing. 2000;4(1):30–37
  3. Sharts-Hopko NC. Assessing rigor in qualitative research. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care. 2002;13(4):84–86
  4. Tuckett AG. Part II. Rigour in qualitative research: complexities and solutions. Nurse Researcher. 2005;13(1):29–42
  5. Merrriam S. What can you tell from an N of 1? Issues of validity and reliabilty in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning. 1995;4:51–60
  6. Miles M, Huberman A. An expanded source book: qualitative data analysis. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 1994;
  7. Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage; 1985;
  8. Rolfe G. Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: quality and the idea of qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2006;53(3):304–310
  9. Emden C, Sandelowski M. The good, bad and the relative, part two: Goodness and the criterion problem in qualitative research. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 1999;5:2–7
  10. Tobin GA, Begley CM. Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2004;48(4):388–396
  11. Morse JM, Barrett M, Mayan M, Olson K, Spiers J. Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2002;1(2):1–19
  12. Adams J, Smith T. Qualitative methods in radiography research: a proposed framework. Radiography. 2003;9(3):193–199
  13. Cormack D. The research process in nursing. 4th ed.. Oxford: Blackwell; 2000;
  14. Silverman D. Qualitative research: theory, methods and practice. London: Sage; 1999;
  15. Bradbury-Jones C. Enhancing rigour in qualitative health research: exploring subjectivity through Peshkin's I's. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2007;59(3):290–298
  16. Bryman A. The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology?. In:  de Vaus D editors. Social Surveys. vol. 1:London: Sage; 2002;p. 13–29
  17. Arminio J, Hultgren F. Breaking out from the shadow: the question of criteria in qualitative research. Journal of College Student Development. 2002;43(4):446–456
  18. Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 2nd ed.. London: Routledge; 1995;
  19. Koch T. Establishing rigour in qualitative research: the decision trail. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2006;53(1):91–100
  20. Brever FK, Mruck R, Wolff-Michael A. Subjectivity and reflexivity: an introduction. Forum Qualitative Research. 2002;1:
  21. Guba E, Lincoln Y. Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. Jossey-Bass; 1992.
  22. Emden C, Sandelowski M. The good, bad and the relative, part one: conceptions of goodness in qualitative research. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 1998;4:206–212
  23. Sandelowski M. Rigor or rigor mortis: the problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited. Advanced in Nursing Science. 1993;12(2):1–8

PII: S1078-8174(09)00060-1

doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2009.07.003

Radiography
Volume 16, Issue 1 , Pages 62-67 , February 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution