Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 616

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reconceptualizing rigour: the case for reflexivity

Koch, Tina, Harrington, Ann·1998·Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract

Reconceptualising rigour: the case for reflexivity This paper is a critical review of recent discussions of rigour in nursing research. We will argue that ‘borrowing’ evaluation criteria from one paradigm of inquiry and applying them to another is problematic. We attempt to map the ‘rigour’ field and add a dimension to the existing debate about rigour and qualitative research through inclusion of reflexivity guided by philosophical hermeneutics. We describe reflexivity and appeal to writers to incorporate a reflexive account into their research product by signposting to readers ‘what is going on’ while researching. We contend that researchers bring to the research product, data generated, a range of literature, a positioning of this literature, a positioning of oneself, and moral socio‐political contexts. We suggest that reflexive research is characterized by ongoing self‐critique and self‐appraisal and that the research product can be given shape by the politics of location and positioning. We emphasize that in the creation of a text (the research product) it is desirable that the researcher be a skilled writer. Finally we claim that if the research product is well signposted, the readers will be able to travel easily through the worlds of the participants and makers of the text (the researchers) and decide for themselves whether the text is believable or plausible (our terms for rigour).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00725.x

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 616

Metadata

Authors
Koch, T., & Harrington, A.
Venue
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-10
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
882-890
ISSN
  • 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2648
OpenAlex
W2120988635
Cited by
616
References
27
FWCI
37.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reconceptualizing rigour: the case for reflexivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00725.x
The paper
Koch, T., & Harrington, A. (1998). Reconceptualizing rigour: the case for reflexivity. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00725.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.