LA GRAN ESPOSA REAL DE TUTANKAMÓN

Confirmability refers to how study findings and interpretations result in the dependable process of data collection. In the study, an inquiry audit is based on accuracy, relevance, and meaning (Lincoln & Guba, 2013:105).

In this study, confirmability techniques were achieved through an inquiry audit, reflexivity, a reflexive journal, and triangulation, so that the data reflected the participants’ voices.

54 | P a g e

A confirmability audit is a chronological collection of all materials and documentation, i.e. field notes, audio tape recordings, interview transcripts, coding details, and the research proposal (Polit & Beck, 2013:327).

In this study, the confirmability audit was achieved by the co-supervisor, supervisor, and the independent coder who finalised and made conclusions regarding the data.

 Reflexivity

According to Creswell (2014:186) and Laws et al. (2013:400), reflexivity refers to an open concept where the researcher’s own viewpoint and background reflects on the biases, experiences, and values that she brings to the research study. It locates the researcher in the research project. It is continuous through data collection, data analysis, interpretation of findings, and writing (Holloway & Galvin, 2017:316).

Reflexive journals are notes the researcher uses to document their own personal experiences, reflections, and progress in their field of study (Brink et al., 2015:127).

In this study, reflexivity was achieved by using in-depth, phenomenological, individual interviews, observations, audio tape recordings, and field notes regarding the nurses’ leadership roles.

55 | P a g e

Table 2. 1: A summary of strategies to ensure trustworthiness according to Lincoln & Guba’s criteria.

STRATEGY CRITERIA APPLICABILITY

Credibility Prolonged

Engagement

 prolonged engagement with the nurses to establish trust and good rapport during the study; and

 ensured data saturation was obtained during the study through in-depth, phenomenological, individual interviews.

Persistent Observation

 field notes were used to record activities and behaviours that occurred during the in-depth, phenomenological, individual interviews.

Triangulation  different methods of data collection were used, namely in-depth, phenomenological, individual interviews, observations, and field notes.

Member-checking  the researcher performed member- checking with the participants during the interviews to validate the information’s correctness; and

 provided feedback to participants. Peer Debriefing  dense description of research

56 | P a g e

 two supervisors and an independent coder with master’s and doctorate qualifications were involved in this study.

Transferability Thick Description  there was a thick description of the

methods used to conduct the in-depth, phenomenological, individual interviews and the settings were discussed;

 a description of participants’ demographic profile was provided;  a complete description of sampling

and design was provided; and

 results were contextualised in the literature .

Nominated Sample  purposive sampling was used in this study.

Dependability Audit  audio tapes, field notes, and

transcripts were verified by an independent coder.

Dense Description  the research methodology was described.

Code-record Technique

 a consensus discussion was held with the independent coder during data analysis.

Stepwise Replication  the same questions were posed to all participants during the interview sessions.

Confirmability Audit  field notes were checked and reflected

57 | P a g e

Reflexive Journal  field notes were checked and reflected upon; and

 the researcher used field notes and journals during the in-depth, individual, phenomenological interviews.

Triangulation  efficient methods for in-depth, phenomenological, individual interviews, observations, and field notes were employed.

2.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Ethical considerations refer to the researcher undertaking the study in an ethical manner throughout the study process (Brink et al., 2015:32). The aim of ethical considerations is to protect the study participants and the researcher.

To protect the rights of participants in this study, the researcher adhered to four ethical principles (beneficence, justice, non-maleficence, autonomy, and confidentiality) as recommended by Dhai and McQuoid-Mason (2011:14-15).

Principle of beneficence

Beneficence is doing good, and no harm, and the researcher acted in the participants’ interests and protected them from any discomfort and harm (Dhai & McQuoid-Mason, 2011:14-15)

In this study, the right to equality, justice, human dignity, and protection was ensured through the informed consent for data collection and by protecting the participants from

58 | P a g e

harm. The researcher’s telephone number was made available to participants so that they could contact the researcher if they required more information on the study. Participants also had the right to withdraw if they wished to, and their withdrawal from the study was respected.

Principle of justice

Justice refers to the distribution of justice. All participants were treated fairly without discrimination (Dhai & McQuoid-Mason, 2011:14-15).

In this study, the context of the research indicates fairness and equity of all participants. Participants had the right to share their experiences without any unforeseen risk or discomfort, and they had the right to withdraw from the study at any stage without any penalty. The researcher presented the study to all the participants who met the inclusion criteria, and also invited those who were willing to participate in the study to do so. Participants had a fair chance of being selected (Botma et al., 2010:19-20).

Principle of non-maleficence

According to Dhai and McQuoid-Mason (2011:14-15), non-maleficence is avoiding harm coming to the participants, or doing as little harm as possible. In this study, the researcher respected and secured the wellbeing of all participants by refraining from any means of physical, emotional, spiritual, or social discomfort and harm coming to the participants.

Autonomy and confidentiality

 Autonomy

Autonomy acknowledges participants’ rights to self-determination and participants’ autonomous choice in DM (Dhai & McQuoid-Mason, 2011:14-15). Participants had the right to terminate their participation at any time without any negative impact on them, and in this study, the researcher obtained informed consent (Annexure 7), and participants

59 | P a g e

also consented to the use an audio recorder (Annexure 8) before the study commenced. Consent is the prospective participant’s agreement to participate in a study as a participant, which the participant agrees to after assimilating essential information about the study (Burns et al., 2013:176).

In this study, autonomy was highly respected by the researcher, supervisors, and the independent coder in terms of protecting the participants’ identities.

 Confidentiality

Confidentiality refers to a researcher’s responsibility to prevent all data collected during the study from exposing participants, and the researcher ensured that the participants’ information (Annexure 6) regarding the study topic was not divulged without the participants’ permission (Brink et al., 2015:38; Burns et al., 2013:177-178).

In this study, confidentiality was obtained by using code names for participants instead of identifying the real participants by name.

2.7 CONCLUSION

Chapter 2 provided a detailed description of how the study was conducted in order to achieve the research objectives. The research paradigm and theoretical framework for the leadership role was established, and the research design used was qualitative, phenomenological, exploratory, descriptive, and contextual in nature. The research methodology focused on the population, sample and sampling, pilot study, data collection, and data analysis. The measures to ensure trustworthiness and ethical considerations were also discussed in more detail in this chapter.

60 | P a g e

CHAPTER 3