The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Rigor or rigor mortis: The problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited
Abstract
Issues are raised by the persistent concern with achieving rigor in qualitative research, including the rigidity that often characterizes the search for validity in qualitative work and the threat to validity that the search for reliability may pose. Member validation is highlighted as a technique that exemplifies not only the practical, but also the profoundly theoretical, representational, and even moral problems raised by all procedures aimed at ensuring the trustworthiness of qualitative work.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 · Cited by 20,772
Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2015) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573 · Cited by 7,594
Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/160940690200100202 · Cited by 4,978
Member Checking: A Tool to Enhance Trustworthiness or Merely a Nod to Validation?
Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732316654870 · Cited by 3,970
O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12860 · Cited by 2,619
“…checking affords the focus group discussion participants the opportunity to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences (Doyle, 2007), the process has been criticised based on epistemological and methodological challenges as outlined by Sandelowski (1993), Morse (1994) and Angen (2000).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Sandelowski, M.
- Venue
- Advances in Nursing Science
- Published
- 1993-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-8
- ISSN
- 0161-9268 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2051917704
- Cited by
- 1,299
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.37
- 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: Rigor or rigor mortis: The problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00012272-199312000-00002
- The paper
- Sandelowski, M. (1993). Rigor or rigor mortis: The problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited. Advances in Nursing Science. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-199312000-00002
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.
