title: Member checking and Heideggerian phenomenology: a redundant component.
abstract: Although member-checking has long been accepted as the gold standard in quantitative research, it is not the pinnacle for expressing rigour in Heideggerian phenomenology because it contradicts many o the underpinning philosophies. Similarly, employing 'experts' to confirm findings conflicts with the values of interpretivism. In this paper, th authors argue that member-checking is frequently used to cover poor interview technique or a lack of understanding of the methodology chosen to underpin the study. They debate why member-checking is incongruent with Heideggerian philosophy and suggest strategies that enhance the generation of data and render the follow-u interview redundant.
authors.affiliation: School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Churchill, Australia.
authors.forename: Tracy
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: McConnell-Henry
authors.forename: Ysanne
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Chapman
authors.forename: Karen
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Francis
mesh_terms: D007407:Interviews as Topic; D015399:Nursing Research / Q000379:methods*