Triangulation in Data Collection
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?
Triangulation of data ensured the analysis was rigorous and comprehensive.
“This triangulation of data ensured that the analysis was rigorous and comprehensive (Flick 2018).”
From My Teammate is an AI: Evaluating Generative AI in Game Asset Creation through a Post-GameJam Study (2025) · cites this paper as Flick 2018
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Naeem, M., & Ozuem, W. (2022) · Information Technology & People · doi:10.1108/itp-01-2021-0061 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Qualitative research: Defining features and guiding principles
Alam, M. S., & Asmawi, A. (2024) · Forum for Education Studies · doi:10.59400/fes.v2i2.1262 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
My Teammate is an AI: Evaluating Generative AI in Game Asset Creation through a Post-GameJam Study
Bezzina, S., & Dingli, A. (2025) · DiGRA Digital Library · doi:10.26503/dl.v2025i2.2438
- Authors
- Flick, U.
- Corresponding author
- Flick, Uwe
- ORCID
- Flick, Uwe
- Venue
- The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications Ltd
- Published
- 2018
- Pages
- 527-544
- OpenAlex
- W2783678084
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 45.65
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
- Keywords
- triangulation, data collection, data triangulation
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
