Establishing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research in Social Work: Implications from a Study Regarding Spirituality
Abstract
As the use of qualitative inquiry increases within the field of social work, researchers must consider the issue of establishing rigor in qualitative research. This article presents research procedures used in a study of autoethnographies that were written regarding the experience of being Jewish. In this project, the researchers utilized reflexivity, audit trail, triangulation by observer, peer debriefing, member check and prolonged engagement in order to manage the threats to trustworthiness as discussed by Padgett (1998). Implications of the project suggest that research procedures utilized by qualitative researchers to establish rigor are an important way to increase our confidence that the voice of the participants is heard, therefore fitting the mission of the social work profession.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The mothers who were interviewed provided input on the themes' accuracy and dependability.
“The mothers who were interviewed also provided input on the themes’ accuracy and dependability [36].”
From Understanding mothers’ lived experiences of postpartum depression: a qualitative phenomenological study (2025) · cites this paper as [36]
Cites
Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000) · Theory Into Practice · doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 · Cited by 9,184 · cited 4× · see citing works
“…meaning, it is still important to establish some level of confidence that qualitative research represents the meanings of its participants (Creswell, 1998; Creswell and Miller, 2000; Horsburgh, 2003; Johnson and Waterfield, 2004; Li, 2004; Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Padgett, 1998; Seale, 2002).”
InfluentialEthics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research
Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1077800403262360 · Cited by 2,671 · see citing works
Evaluation of qualitative research
Horsburgh, D. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00683.x · Cited by 459 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Now I see it, now I don’t: researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research
Berger, R. (2015) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/1468794112468475 · Cited by 4,031 · see citing works
“Thus, it enhances the quality of the research by allowing researchers to ponder the ways in which who they are may both assist and hinder the process of co-constructing meanings (Lietz et al., 2006), frees them to handle and present the data better, and consider its complex meanings and contribution to the understandi…”
InfluentialA qualitative study of COPD-patients’ experience of a telemedicine intervention
Nissen, L., & Lindhardt, T. (2017) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.08.004 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
ERYILMAZ, Ö. (2022) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.22.70.9.3 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Cirban Ekrem, E., Kurt, A., & Kilci Erciyas, Ş. (2025) · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · doi:10.1186/s12884-025-08538-4 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lietz, C. A., Langer, C. L., & Furman, R.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire (US)
- University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
- Venue
- Qualitative Social Work
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 441-458
- ISSN
- 1473-3250 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3117
- OpenAlex
- W2054966008
- Cited by
- 475
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 20.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Qualitative Social Work (publishedVersion)
- University of Washington Tacoma Digital Commons (University of Washington Tacoma) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Social Work Education and Practice
- Keywords
- trustworthiness, qualitative research rigor, reflexivity, audit trail, triangulation, peer debriefing, member checking, autoethnography, Jewish identity, social work research
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
