Research Procedure

This research was approved by the Department of Psychology and the Faculty Research, Technology and Innovation Committee of the Faculty of Health Sciences of the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU), as well as the NMMU Research Ethics Committee (Human). The method of obtaining access to research participants and the process of data collection will be described in the following paragraphs.

70

4.6.1. Access to Participants

The researcher contacted an HIV wellness clinic in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan area in order to request the assistance of this organisation with the recruitment of research participants. The involvement of this specific HIV wellness clinic was a critical step in conducting this research, as this organisation was able to identify potential research participants, and to obtain their consent to participate in this research – without having to disclose their identity. Subsequently, a meeting was held with the head of this HIV wellness clinic. The aim of this meeting was to briefly introduce the research and to request the assistance of the HIV wellness clinic with the research. After being provided with the research proposal, and following a discussion based on the research proposal, the HIV wellness clinic offered their support for this study.

Since this HIV wellness clinic forms part of the Port Elizabeth Hospital Complex, a written request for approval to commence with this research was directed to the Head of Clinical Governance of the Port Elizabeth Hospital Complex (Appendix B). Subsequently, clearance to conduct the research was received (Appendix C).

4.6.2. Data Collection

HIV-positive people who receive services from the HIV wellness clinic visit this clinic on a recurrent basis. During each visit, an individual is given a date for his/her next visit, but no specific appointment time is scheduled. Upon arrival at the clinic, individuals are assisted on a first-come first-serve basis. Consequently, visitors to the clinic usually arrive in the mornings and then wait in a seated queue. The queue is situated in a room in the centre of the facility adjacent to the reception area, consultation rooms, a nursing station, a pharmacy and the entrance to a corridor leading to a boardroom.

The management of this HIV wellness clinic made the boardroom available to the researcher for the purposes of data collection. The boardroom was well ventilated, well lighted, and furnished with comfortable chairs and a table which made the room suitable for the administration of psychometric measures.

The research measures were administered daily over a period of two weeks. On each day of data collection, the researcher, accompanied by a member of staff of the HIV wellness clinic addressed the group of people waiting in the queue. Clinic visitors were provided with a brief introduction to the research project, using the letter to participants (Appendix D) as a script. Following this introduction, it was explained to clinic visitors that they could volunteer to participate in the research by taking a seat holder card specifically designed for this study from a table in front of the waiting area. Clinic visitors who were willing to participate in this study could collect a seat holder card and place this card on their seat to prevent them from losing their position in the queue, while they were in the boardroom completing the research protocols. No incentives were offered to elicit participation, but following the completion of the research protocols, research participants were offered a glass of orange juice as a token of appreciation for their willingness to volunteer as research participants.

As participants arrived at the boardroom, they were welcomed by the researcher and were offered a seat at the boardroom table. Before administering the research protocol, the researcher briefly screened the participants, in order to ensure that they met the inclusion criteria. In cases where volunteers did not meet the inclusion criteria, it was reiterated to them that their exclusion from the research was not disadvantageous or detrimental to them in any way; and, furthermore, it was emphasised that data collection was merely a survey that would have no direct or indirect benefits for the participants. Volunteers who did not meet the inclusion criteria were also offered a glass of orange juice in order to ensure that they were not disadvantaged by their exclusion.

72

Following the initial screening, each participant was handed a copy of the letter to participants, which provided them with written information about the research, and a consent form (Appendix E). The content of the consent form was explained to each participant and each participant was then offered an opportunity to withdraw his/her participation.

After participants were given time to read and sign the consent form, the research protocols and the required stationary were handed to them. Instructions regarding the completion of each measure were then given to each participant. At the onset of administering the research protocols, participants were invited to ask any questions regarding the research, the research measures or the instructions. Participants were also encouraged to ask questions, during the administration of the measures, with regard to any uncertainty about the measures, the instructions, any specific item of a measure or any uncertainty regarding the language used in the measures. The researcher was present at all times during the administration of the research measures. At times, more than one participant was completing research protocols at the same time in the boardroom. The size of the boardroom and the size of the boardroom table were sufficient to prevent disturbance of research participants concurrently completing research protocols.

Upon completion of the research protocols, these were placed in a box which was kept completely separate from another box in which the signed consent forms were placed. Prior to departure, each participant was asked to recount his/her experience of completing the measures. This was done in order to screen for possible adverse effects as a result of participation in this research. No adverse effects were reported by any participant.

Following the completion of the data collection, data from all the completed protocols were captured on an electronic spreadsheet system. This data capturing was done by a contracted research assistant. Once the initial data capturing by the research assistant was complete, the researcher checked the accuracy of the captured data by manually comparing

the electronic data with the original protocols. Each measure, as well as the subscales of each measure, was then scored electronically. The results of this electronic scoring were checked by an independent researcher by comparing the results of the electronic scoring with the results of the manually scored protocols.