Rigor of Qualitative Research

Rigor, in the context of qualitative research, refers to the trustworthiness, credibility, and overall quality of the research process and findings. It is about ensuring that the research design, methods, and conclusions are robust, transparent, and free from bias, maximizing the accuracy and trustworthiness of the result.

Rigor versus Trustworthiness

The terms rigor and trustworthiness are often used interchangeably in the context of qualitative research.

While interconnected, there are subtle distinctions that are worth exploring.

Rigor represents a holistic commitment to quality in research, encompassing various aspects of the research process, including methodological integrity, ethical considerations, and robust reporting.

Trustworthiness, while a crucial component of rigor, focuses more specifically on the credibility and believability of the research findings themselves.

• Rigor sets the stage for trustworthiness. By adhering to rigorous methodological practices throughout the research process, researchers create the foundation for producing trustworthy findings.
• Trustworthiness, in turn, becomes a measure of the effectiveness of the rigor applied. If a study lacks trustworthiness, it suggests that the rigor employed was insufficient to ensure the credibility and believability of the research.
• While trustworthiness centers on the findings, rigor encompasses the entire research endeavor. A study can exhibit rigor in its design, data collection, and analysis but still fall short in terms of trustworthiness if the interpretations are not well-supported or if the researcher’s biases have unduly influenced the findings.

Feature	Rigor	Trustworthiness
Scope	Encompasses the entire research process, from conceptualization and design to data collection, analysis, interpretation, and reporting. Represents a holistic commitment to quality.	Focuses specifically on the credibility and believability of the research findings. Reflects the level of confidence readers can have in the truthfulness and authenticity of the results.
Goal	To ensure that the research process is conducted with high standards of methodological integrity, transparency, and ethical considerations, ultimately leading to credible and trustworthy findings.	To establish confidence in the truth value, applicability, consistency, and neutrality of the research findings. It aims to persuade the audience that the research process and outcomes are credible, transferable, dependable, and confirmable.
Criteria	Includes a broad range of considerations, including methodological integrity, appropriate sampling, data saturation, triangulation, member checking, reflexivity, thick description, audit trail, and the coherence and significance of findings.	Centers on four key criteria: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability
Methods	Emphasizes a variety of strategies to enhance the quality of the research process, such as prolonged engagement, persistent observation, triangulation, member checking, reflexivity, thick description, and maintenance of a detailed audit trail.	Relies on specific techniques to address each of the four criteria, including member checking, triangulation, peer review/debriefing, prolonged engagement, persistent observation, thick, rich descriptions, audit trail, and reflexivity
Outcome	Aims to generate findings that are credible, trustworthy, and contribute meaningfully to the field of study. Rigorous research produces insights that are well-supported by the data, thoughtfully interpreted, and clearly communicated.	Seeks to ensure that the research findings are believable and trustworthy in the eyes of the audience. Trustworthy research engenders confidence in the quality of the research process and the validity of the interpretations.

1. Methodological Integrity

• Rigorous qualitative research necessitates a deliberate and well-justified selection of methods that align with the research question, the underlying theoretical framework, and the nature of the data being collected.
• The chosen methods should be applied with fidelity, ensuring that the procedures employed are consistent with the methodological principles and assumptions.
• Methodological integrity also involves adapting methods thoughtfully to fit the specific research context. We caution against blindly following procedural templates without considering the unique demands of the research project.

2. Sampling and Data Collection

• Rigor in sampling involves selecting participants who can provide rich and relevant insights into the phenomenon under investigation. This typically involves employing purposive sampling techniques rather than random sampling, as the goal is not generalizability but deep understanding.
• Rigorous data collection demands prolonged engagement with participants and the research setting. This extended involvement allows researchers to build rapport, gain a nuanced understanding of the context, and capture the complexities of the phenomenon.
• Data saturation is a crucial marker of rigorous data collection. It signifies the point at which no new information is emerging from the data, indicating that sufficient data has been collected to develop a comprehensive understanding.

3. Data Analysis and Interpretation

• Triangulation, the use of multiple data sources, methods, or researchers to analyze the data, is a cornerstone of rigorous qualitative analysis. This approach enhances the credibility and comprehensiveness of the findings by providing multiple perspectives on the phenomenon.
• Member checking, where researchers share their findings with participants to solicit feedback and verify accuracy, can be a valuable strategy for enhancing rigor. However, we caution against considering member checking as a universal “gold standard”. They emphasize the importance of recognizing the potential complexities and challenges associated with this technique.
• Developing a clear and well-defined conceptual framework is essential for guiding the research process and aiding in the interpretation of findings. The framework provides a lens through which to analyze the data and helps to ensure that the findings are grounded in existing theory and knowledge.

4. Reflexivity and Reporting

• Reflexivity, the researcher’s ongoing critical reflection on their own positionality and potential biases, is paramount to rigorous qualitative research. This self-awareness helps to mitigate the influence of subjectivity on the research process and findings.
• Thick description of the research context, participants, methods, and findings is crucial for enabling readers to assess the credibility and transferability of the research. This detailed reporting provides transparency and allows readers to make informed judgments about the quality of the research.
• Maintaining a comprehensive audit trail, which involves meticulously documenting the research process from start to finish, enhances transparency and facilitates scrutiny of the methods employed. This documentation allows others to trace the researcher’s decisions and reasoning, contributing to the dependability of the study.

5. Coherence and Meaningful Contribution

• Rigorous qualitative research aims to generate findings that are coherent, logically connected, and contribute meaningfully to existing knowledge in the field.
• The importance of “closing the loop,” which involves explicitly linking the research question, study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation to demonstrate a clear and logical progression.
• The findings should be integrated with the conceptual framework, and the implications of the research, both theoretical and practical, should be thoughtfully discussed.

common misconceptions about rigor

• Qualitative research is inherently less rigorous than quantitative research: This is a false dichotomy. Rigor is crucial in both approaches, albeit manifested through different criteria and strategies. Qualitative research, when conducted rigorously, can offer valuable, in-depth insights that complement and enrich quantitative findings.
• Member checking guarantees the validity of the research: While member checking can be a useful strategy, it is not a foolproof method for ensuring validity and should not be treated as a “gold standard”. Participant agreement does not necessarily equate to accuracy, and that member checking can sometimes introduce new complexities or power dynamics into the research process.
• Rigor in qualitative research is about following a set of rigid rules: While established guidelines and criteria are helpful, rigor in qualitative research is not about blindly adhering to a checklist. Researchers must exercise critical judgment, adapt strategies to their specific research contexts, and be transparent about their decision-making process.
• Qualitative researchers should strive for objectivity: While qualitative researchers should aim to minimize bias, complete objectivity is unattainable and even undesirable in qualitative research. Instead of aiming for neutrality, qualitative researchers should embrace reflexivity, acknowledge their subjectivity, and leverage their unique perspectives to generate insightful interpretations.

Reading List

• Anney, V. N. (2014). Ensuring the quality of the findings of qualitative research: Looking at trustworthiness criteria.
• Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ectj, 29(2), 75-91.
• Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American journal of occupational therapy, 45(3), 214-222.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1982). Establishing dependability and confirmability in naturalistic inquiry through an audit.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New directions for program evaluation, 1986(30), 73-84.
• Schwandt, T. A., Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2007). Judging interpretations: But is it rigorous? trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New directions for evaluation, 2007(114).
• Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75.