how we ensured rigor from a multi-site, multi-discipline, multi-researcher study

Clicks: 93
ID: 234085
2000
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #692 of 729 articles by views in molecules

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 729 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Qualitative research has often been criticised for its lack of rigour. In order to overcome this, measures of trustworthiness, dependability and reliability have been suggested. A study of how pastoralists learn to incorporate sustainable farming systems in the tropical savannas of Australia employed multiple-researchers, working in three States and from a variety of disciplines. To ensure rigour a framework for the study was developed by the researchers prior to commencing interviews. This was followed by regular teleconferences to ensure that the framework was valid and to adjust for any problems encountered along the way. Every interview was analysed independently by all researchers before a workshop was conducted to bring the ideas together. Categories and ideas within the data were synthesised to create an overall understanding of the learning process within the confines of "landcare" in the Tropical Savannas. These processes were undertaken in consultation with the pastoralists and the process has been explicitly documented to enable readers to follow the research process easily. The rigour in this project is shown in the clear documentation of the research process carried out by individual researchers and by the team when it met. The understanding of pastoralists' learning processes is our interpretation; it is up to the reader to decide whether s/he agrees with that interpretation, but from the description of the process it is easy for the reader to see where and why her/his interpretation differs. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0001125
Reference Key
crawford2000forum:how Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;H. Ken Crawford;Marnie L. Leybourne;Allan Arnott
Journal molecules
Year 2000
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1122
Keywords
social sciences (general)

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.