Member Check

Establishing Credibility

Conducting member checks is a method that qualitative researchers use to enhance the validity or trustworthiness of a study; specifically, member checks are often used to establish credibility, which means that the research findings are believable to research participants. Validity in qualitative research should not be thought of as simply being achievable through a checklist of items. Because validity refers to the quality and rigor of a study, researchers should engage in validity techniques systematically throughout an entire study, and member checks are an important way to engage participants at various stages of data collection and analysis. It is in this regard that member checks can inform the credibility of a study because conducting member checks means that participants have had opportunities to react to the data and/or researchers’ interpretations. Member checks should be conducted with fidelity to participants and their experiences in such a way that participants’ feedback and challenges are seriously considered and help inform the interpretive frames of a study.

Process Overview

Member checks can occur in a variety of ways. For example, they may take place informally during data collection (i.e., during an interview or focus group to check for understanding) or more formally during a follow-up interview, meeting, or conversation. Member checks can involve checking in with participants to determine accuracy, engaging in sustained dialogue with participants, and/or involving participants in collaborative data analysis processes.

The processes that researchers select vary depending on the qualitative approach, study goals, research questions, and issues of participant availability and access. The process should involve sufficient time in the overall research design and timeline so that researchers can actively engage with and respond to participants’ critiques, interpretations, and additions. Ideally, member checks [Page 1050]are employed at multiple points throughout a study so that they are proactively and intentionally structured into a study’s research design and not tacked on at the end of a study. When done with fidelity, participant validation processes often result in additional data that can contribute to a study’s ability to capture and represent complexity. These processes (e.g., follow-up interviews) should be systematically recorded and analyzed in the same ways as all other forms of data.

...