3 Methodology and Methods 31
3.6 Methodological Rigour 52
To enhance methodological rigour for Studies 1 and 2, consistent attention was paid to transcendent criteria for trustworthiness as described by Morrow 51 and summarized in Table 1. This section describes and explains the choice of Morrow’s criteria and the application for both Studies one and two. I chose Morrow’s transcendent criteria based on my belief that it best resonates with my research objectives and that it may allow me to demonstrate quality of this research to an audience who does not share a constructivist research paradigm.
Morrow’s criteria for adequacy of data and of interpretation require the researcher to seek confirming and disconfirming evidence, describing how the data or voices of the researcher and participants was integrated with a balance of researcher’s interpretations and participants’ quotations. Furthermore, Morrow’s criteria for subjectivity and
reflexivity demand that researcher be transparent about their influence and positioning as co-constructors of meaning. Investigating a research problem that is of social, political and/or practical significance (i.e., social validity), and doing so in a comprehensive manner with various sources of information, and a well-defined analytic framework builds confidence in the reader that the findings are valuable, credible, useful or simply trustworthy. Table 2 provides a description of each criterion, and further discussion of exactly what was done in each study to attend to Morrow’s criteria, are offered in the sub-sections for Study 1 and Study 2.
Table 1. Morrow's Transcendent Criteria for Trustworthiness
Criteria Description
Social Validitya Social significance of research goals; appropriateness of data
collection/analysis procedures; importance of study result effects.
Subjectivity and Reflexivity Constructivist paradigm requires researchers to embrace their positioning as co-‐constructors of meaning; engage in reflexivity by keeping an ongoing record of “experiences, reactions, and … assumptions or biases”b to inform the analysis process, and/or
critical discussion with peer researchers and participants regarding correction, direction and feedback on interpretations of findingsc
Adequacy of Data Used various types/sources of information; spent sufficient time in the setting to build rapport; and gathered evidence until no new or disconfirming evidence emerged.
Adequacy of Interpretation Articulation of analytic framework; balance researchers’ interpretations of the findings and supporting quotations; clarity and depth of interpretations describing how data was integrated.
a. This criteria drew on the work of Wolf, M. M. (1978); b. Morrow 2005; c. Morrow explained this step is especially important when the interviewer is very familiar with or an insider to the culture or phenomenon studied.
3.6.1
Social validity
This study is proposed to have social validity given the central constructs of inactivity and chronic disease among older adults—especially in rural areas, represent significant social issues and Canadian health care system priorities. 27, 28 Furthermore the goals for this dissertation are to provide contextual examples to enhance our understanding of exercise as self-care and self-management. In doing so, the findings from this dissertation could inform chronic disease care strategies and practices enacted by older adults and community health service providers, particularly physiotherapists.
3.6.2
Subjectivity and reflexivity
A journal was used to record participant observations, informal discussions, and non- verbal gestures during interviews. This journal was also used to flesh out an
understanding of my assumptions about observations, informal discussions, non-verbal gestures, and co-construction of themes with respect to my experiences as a
physiotherapist, as a Nova Scotian and as a seasonal community resident of the research setting in Study 1. Each interview transcript for Studies one and two was reviewed separately by my thesis supervisor and myself. A critical discussion followed to flesh out preliminary development and final refinement of themes with a conscious reflection on my personal influences or assumptions in relation to the findings and interpretations. In Study one follow up interviews were conducted to share preliminary themes with
participants and to allow opportunity for further discussion and construction of themes. In study two, follow up interviews were not conducted, but the interviewing technique was modified to ensure shared understanding of experience was being achieved. Specifically, I stopped to summarize and ask for further clarification on each explanation provided by the participants. The purpose of these checks was to ensure themes and case constructions resonated with the participants themselves.
3.6.3
Adequacy of data
To demonstrate adequacy of data I articulated the semi-structured interview strategies with open-ended questions employed for studies one and two. I continued to gather data, seeking confirming and disconfirming findings until patterns or similarities between the transcripts were co-constructed. This was accomplished by comparing interpretations with various sources of data. Specifically, I used participant checks, follow-up
interviews, and (in Study 1) participant observations. Furthermore, I sought to acquire additional sources of information from local and published literature on each research setting and prospective participants, and through informal dialogue with gatekeepers to round out my understandings and highlight any possible personal assumptions that might have influenced the analysis processes.
According to Morrow, the interpretive status of evidence is influenced by the amount of time spent immersed in the setting and time building rapport. Immersion in the field is particularly important for ethnography. I have lived and worked in the investigated settings for both Study 1 and Study 2 for several months and years, respectively. From ethnography literature, I would position my role as a participant-as-observer, where I
participate in both settings and am known to the members of both settings. 29 However, the extent of my participation is limited to the extent to which the members of each setting view me as an insider. 29 To residents of the community interviewed for Study 1, I may have been considered both an insider and an outsider. Specifically, I was born and grew up in southern Nova Scotia until I was twenty-one at which time I moved to Ontario to pursue graduate studies. I lived and worked in the investigated community seasonally over three years. However, I was arguably an outsider given that I did not live year-round nor grow up in the community studied. Additionally, I am in my twenties, interviewing individuals who were over the age of sixty-five. The majority of the residents in this community were over the age of sixty-five. I could be called an insider by those who represent community physiotherapists in southern Ontario being that I am a
physiotherapist, who lives and works in southern Ontario. During my first year of physiotherapy training in southern Ontario I completed a six-week student clinical placement in a community physiotherapy practice setting which provided me the opportunity to experience community practice first-hand. The majority of the clients I saw on placement were older adults. I had two preceptors: one provided service in the urban setting and the other provided service in the rural areas outside of the city. My current job requires that I liaise with community physiotherapists to negotiate continuity of care for clients in transitions to/from outpatient care. However, I am an outsider to community physiotherapists where I work in the outpatient department of an urban Southwestern Ontario rehabilitation hospital. Moving beyond the dichotomous
insider/outsider debate, I move to acknowledge myself as a relative insider. 52, 53 Meaning although I can claim partial membership to both settings, I cannot be an absolute insider in either setting. My position as a relative insider augmented the quality of the transcripts and interpretations. Specifically, my familiarity with local, shared, and technical language enabled me to remain faithful to the words of the participants. 52 Unfortunately, my familiarity or closeness to local, shared, and technical language also means that, in describing my findings, tacit or taken-for-granted knowledge 54 may not be explicitly clear to the reader. To avoid this and therefore ensure thick descriptions of the findings, 33 we employed strategies to enhance the adequacy of the interpretation, discussed below.
3.6.4
Adequacy of interpretation
Following the recommendations from Morrow, 51 I sought to improve adequacy of the interpretation by first providing a detailed articulation of the analytical framework for each study. I described rationale and theoretical influences for each step, and described my role and experiences in relation to the settings and interpretations of the findings. Studies one and two involved multiple steps of inductive analysis, sharing the reflexivity journal of field notes and analytical memos with my supervisor, triangulating data from various sources by cross-checking interpretations from interviews, observations, and literature with participants and my supervisor; and finally selecting participant quotes to validate findings. Lastly, theme labels were chosen to remain as faithful to the
participants’ words as possible. I provided description of study context, culture, and rapport with participants, in addition to ensuring a balance in number of quotations to researcher description while remaining true to the language used by participants. These strategies helped to create thick descriptions 33 and clarity or understanding of findings. 51