Rigour

Rigour has its roots in science; however, in qualitative research it refers to the thoroughness and competency of research. The term ‘rigour’ has become a very important tool in evaluating and analysing research projects. In qualitative enquiry, rigour is demonstrated by enabling confirmation of the discovered information

(Holloway & Wheeler, 2013). Grbich (1998) defines rigour as ‘the researcher’s attempt to use as tight a research design as possible’ (p. 61). Correspondingly, in the present study, the researcher has taken the necessary steps in designing, conducting and

presenting the research to ensure rigour. In particular, extra efforts were taken during the data collection of focus group interviews, analysis of transcripts and reporting of

emerged themes and sub-themes, to presented them in a concise, transparent and trustworthy manner. Rigour requires qualitative research be conducted to a high standard, and seeks details, accuracy, trustworthiness and credibility (Holloway & Wheeler, 2013). The criteria for judging the rigour of qualitative research includes: credibility, dependability, confirmability and transformability. These criteria will be highlighted further in the following subsections.

3.14.1.1 Credibility.

Credibility includes any measures taken to increase the chances of producing credible findings (Speziale et al., 2011). In other words, it refers to confidence in qualitative data and the interpretation of those date (Morse, 2003). To achieve this, investigators are advised to extend their involvement with the subject under study. Another significant technique commonly applied by researchers is to report the findings of the investigation back to the participants, for them to check if the findings relate to

their experiences (member checking). Participants may be asked to evaluate their responses against the overall findings (themes) (Creswell & Clark, 2011). Credibility in this study was achieved through a number of strategies. These included logically

establishing the research method, audio recording the focus group data, member checking and using a pilot focus group.

In the present study, the researcher spent ample time studying the nurses’ cultural and religious backgrounds, and engaged with their work regulations and

surroundings. The nurses who participated in the study were diverse in terms of cultural and religious background. The researcher examined all relevant issues surrounding the nurses to enhance his understanding of the group and maximise finding credibility. Within the cultural norms, international and nurses used their own words to explain their opinions during the focus group discussions; these were then used as quotations when the analysis was written up.

3.14.1.2 Confirmability.

Confirmability is a process that enables other researchers to follow and audit the research. That is, by being clear and objective in conducting, documenting, managing and reporting the research process, the drawn conclusions can be traceable and confirmable (Speziale et al. , 2011). Only the involved researcher, who performed the data collection, can confirm the findings (De Witt & Ploeg, 2006). Confirmability is therefore, the confirmation of findings, conclusions and recommendations by the data obtained (Hoskins, 2004). To ensure confirmability in this research, the researcher audio recorded the focus group, established an audit trail and Nvivo. In order to obtain

discussions they researchers were in agreement about the subthemes and the themes. Finally, the emerged data were checked with the participants to obtain participants’ validation.

3.14.1.3 Transferability.

Transferability is the likelihood that the findings of the study can be applied to a similar population or situation, and how significant they are to concerned others

(Speziale et al., 2011). Unlike quantitative research measures, where the generalisability of results can be determined by the author(s), deciding the transferability or ‘fittingness’ of qualitative research findings to other settings is the responsibility of potential users of the findings, not the author(s) (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). This is because the original author is not fully aware of the implementation scenarios (Saini & Shlonsky, 2012). Qualitative researchers must be thoughtful to maximise their work’s potentials. Unless they provide a rigour report of their investigation, the transferability of their findings could be otherwise diminished. To achieve this, the focus groups participants were purposively sampled to represent a variety of different circumstances, providing rich contextual data.

3.14.1.4 Triangulation.

Triangulation in research refers to ‘combining multiple theories, methods, observers and empirical material, to produce a more accurate, comprehensive and objective representation of the object of study’ (Silverman, 2011, p. 369). Triangulation is a technique this researcher used to strengthen the research’s rigour by examining the subject under study from different perspectives. In qualitative research design, the most common application of triangulation is the use of multiple methods (e.g., survey and

focus groups) (Silverman, 2011). If the two employed methods resulted in similar findings, then it is assumed that the validity of those findings has been already

established. This is because the two methods employed in triangulation used different sources of information, and in resulted similar conclusions (Creswell & Clark, 2011).

Further, triangulation employs comprehensive, multi-perspective views and procedures to reduce potential biases within the research design (Silverman, 2011). However, different sources of information are not necessarily equivalent, as what respondents say at a focus group is not always the same as what they actually do in reality; it may also not be consistent with what they write in a questionnaire (Finch & Lewis, 2003). Nevertheless, the researcher in the current study developed an informative interview guide for the focus groups (Phase 2), based on participants’ responses and scores from Phase 1 of the study.