Hide Page

Number

All caps and bold,

in an inverted
triangle shape.

Upper-lower case
and bold,
diamond shape.

Bold and only the

degree is all caps,
in triangular
shape.
Sample Approval Sheet
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

 Can either use first or third person.

 This polite gesture allows you to thank all of the people who helped you with the project,
without falling under the category of citations.

ABSTRACT

 Should follow the IMRAD format.

 Should be singled-space with keywords.

 Refer to Appendix A for IMRAD details.

Sample Table of Contents
 Chapter I

THE PROBLEM

Introduction

Should provide the following:

 A short discussion or background about the major variables/phenomena of the

study. Should present a clear exposition of the topic.
 A back-up literature or study about the major variables/phenomena of the study or
should be supported by scholarly evidence.
 A situationer – could be a personal experience, that prompted the researcher to
conduct the study.
 The practical value of the study to the nursing profession or its importance to the
nursing profession.
 The unknown should be revealed.
 Lastly, the competence of the researcher to conduct the study.

SAMPLE INTRODUCTION

Introduction
Motherhood is the state or experience of having and raising a child. It may sound and
look like it’s a simple sentence but then motherhood is not short of challenges. The perfect
family that you dreamed of before you became a mom oftentimes doesn't align with reality.
However motherhood is still a gift that should be cherished.
A national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Feb.16-March 14 among 2,020
Americans, finds a widespread belief that today’s parents are not measuring up to the standard
that parents set a generation ago. Mothers are seen as having the more difficult job, but they are
also judged more harshly than are fathers. More than half of Americans (56 percent) say that
mothers are doing a worse job today than mothers did 20 or 30 years ago. By comparison,
somewhat fewer people (47 percent) say fathers are doing a worse job than fathers did 20 or 30
years ago (Pew Research Center , 2007).
The biggest challenge in raising children today, according to parents and non-parents
alike, is dealing with the outside influences of society. Nearly four-in-ten Americans (38 percent)
list societal factors when asked in an open-ended format to name the biggest challenge for
parents today. Among the top specific concerns mentioned are drugs and alcohol, peer pressure,
and the impact of television and other media. Beyond societal influences, other perceived
challenges in raising children include teaching morals and values, maintaining discipline,
handling the financial aspects of childrearing, and dealing with the educational system (Pew
Research Center, 2007).
Most women (71 percent) say it is more difficult to be a mother today than it was 20 or
30 years ago. But in Pew’s 1997 motherhood survey, an even greater percentage of women
expressed this view (81 percent). Just as older women are more likely to say today’s mothers are
doing a worse job, they are also more likely to believe the job has become more difficult.
Roughly eight-in-ten women ages 50-64 (81 percent) say it is harder to be a mother today than it
was 20-30 years ago. This compares with 58 percent of women under age 30, 70 percent of
women ages 30-49, and 73 percent of women ages 65 and older (Pew Research Center , 2007).
Teenage pregnancies in the Philippines surged by 70 percent over one decade (Philippine
News Agency, 2012). A nine-year-old girl in Cebu became the youngest mother in Central
Visayas after she gave birth at the Vicente Sotto Memorial Medical Center (VSMMC). The
Regional Population Commission (PopCom-7) also identified a 12-year-old girl from Bogo City
who gave birth last year. PopCom-7 director Bruce Ragas said the rise in early pregnancy rates in
Cebu is alarming (Padayhag, 2015).
The researcher having worked as a nurse in the Pediatric Ward for three years and as an
OBGyn Ward for two years had been exposed to a number of teenage mothers along with the
alarming recent national and local statistics on teenage pregnancy. It was observed personally
that there was an increasing number of teenage mothers. What troubles the researcher the most is
how these teenage mothers cope with the challenges of motherhood. This is one triggering factor
which stimulates the researcher to conduct the study on the experiences of teenage mothers on
motherhood. There had been no studies conducted locally about the lived experiences of these
teenagers on motherhood, making this study a unique one. And the discovery of this information
or knowledge is important as it is unknown especially by localizing the study in Cebu City.
Motherhood is one important aspect in nursing. The study will greatly contribute to the
nursing profession not only in terms of discovering new information about the lived experiences
of teenage mothers on motherhood. Its practical value to the nursing profession is that by
knowing the lived experiences of teenage mothers they will be given an overview of how
motherhood as a teenager is. They will be given insights about the experience and will be able to
pick-up lessons and learning from teenage motherhood. Most importantly, coping with the
experience may be one important learning that can be gained through this study. Findings of the
study could also be used in providing motherhood information in the clinical area during
mother’s class and health education.
The researcher’s interest and determine will be her main tool in accomplishing this research
study, along with experience in conducting research. The researcher is optimistic that this scholarly
undertaking will be a success.

Conceptual or Theoretical Framework

Should point out the theory/theories used in the study. Provide a discussion of the
theory and operationalize the discussion of the theory as used in the study. The researcher
should also provide a schematic representation (figure) of the variables in the study with
the theory/theories included.

Key concepts should be defined conceptually.

If no theory is found to back-up the study, models and philosophies may be used.

In qualitative studies identification of the theory will come at the end of data
gathering.

Atheoretical Stance – ONLY FOR QUALITATIVE DESIGNS

  Explain in here that all assumptions were temporarily suspended and that the conduct
of related literature and studies were done after data gathering.
 This will take the place of theoretical background in qualitative studies at the start of
the study.

SAMPLE

This study maintains the idea on the importance of not being based on a theory as
qualitative researches should be. Therefore, the identification of the theory or model will be done
after data collection is consummated. The study will further involve a suspension of a priori
assumptions as well as a temporary suspension of the review of related literature and studies
primarily to prevent biases.

Philosophical Stance – ONLY FOR QUALITATIVE DESIGNS

o Explain how knowledge is being obtained in the study.

o Explain about the naturalistic paradigm or the naturalistic methodologic
assumption. (constructivist, relativism, interpretivism).

SAMPLE (Phenomenological Study)

The philosophical perspective of the researcher guides the questions asked and the
methods selected for conducting a specific study. In this study the philosophical perspective is
based on phenomenology. The researcher here is ascribed to a view of science that values the
uniqueness of the individual and the holistic approach to understanding human experiences. The
researcher here influences her views of science and as a result, the researcher value rigorous, but
flexible designs to identify study findings. Through the study findings, the understanding of an
experience will be increased using a discovery process that allows a complex picture to emerge
(Grove, Burns & Gray, 2013).
The primary thinking process that will be used in the study is induction where it involves
perceptually putting insights and pieces of information together and identifying abstract themes
or working from the bottom up. From this inductive process, meanings emerge which is variable.
The view of knowing and knowledge in the study is by asking research questions about the
“lived-experiences” of the persons. The data will be analyzed in such a way as to develop a rich,
deep description of an experience from the perspective of the informants (Grove, Burns & Gray,
2013).
In the study, the researcher will use open-ended methods to gather descriptions of
motherhood-related experiences from the informants. These open-ended methods include
interviews, focus group, observation, and document review. Since the researcher will do an oral
method, the researcher will capture the interaction by an audio or video recording so that a
transcript of the communication can be prepared for analysis (Grove, Burns & Gray, 2013).
The criteria of rigor will be met in this study by making the data gathering open to the
individual experiences and through demonstration of methodological congruence, as well as
scrupulous adherence to a philosophical perspective, thoroughness in collecting data,
consideration of all the data in the analysis process and self-understanding. Self-understanding is
important as it allows the researcher to have insights into her potential biases related to the
phenomena of interferes and prevent these biases from interfering with the voices of the
participants being heard (Grove, Burns & Gray, 2013).
The researcher also adapts methods to understand the changes within the nursing
profession in order for the general public to benefit from the study. The main purpose of the
method is to examine the meaning of human experiences from the perspective of the “knower”,
the person/persons to whom the experiences belong. It should also be noted that though the data
that will be gathered is based on the openness of the individual experiences of the study
participants, this fact does not mean that the interpretation is value-free. Each approach is based
on a philosophical orientation that influences the study design from the wording of the research
question through the interpretation of the data (Grove, Burns & Gray, 2013).
This study is phenomenological in nature. Phenomenology is both a philosophy and a
research method. Its purpose is to describe experiences for phenomena as they are lived-in
phenomenological terms, to capture the “lived experience” of study participants. Philosophical
orientation of this study is based on the fact that a person is integral with the environment. The
world is shaped by the self and shapes the self. This study adheres to the philosophy of Hesserl.
According to Husserl, a phenomena make up the world of experience. These experiences cannot
be explained by examining causal relations but need to be studied as the very things they are. A
phenomenon occurs only when there is a person who experiences it. Thus, the experience must
be described, not studied using statistics or the researcher’s pre-conceived ideas. To describe the
experience the researcher must open to the participants world view, set aside personal
perspectives and allow meanings to emerge. The researcher will set aside one’s beliefs during the
study or bracketing will be done (Grove, Burns & Gray, 2013).

THE PROBLEM

Statement of Purpose

Should be stated clearly and should be easily identified.

The primary statement should contain:

P – Purpose of the study

L - Location of the study

O – Object of the study

T – Time frame
When formulating statement of the problem follow this guide: (To match the questions
with the method used)

In quantitative:
  identifies the key study variables and their possible interrelationship, as well as
nature of the population of interest.

Experimental test Needs scientific control

evaluate
Non-experimental examine Needs no scientific control
(correlational)
assess
Experimental/Non- Compare
experimental (comparative)

In qualitative

 indicates the nature of the inquiry, the key concept, phenomenon, and the group,
community, or setting under study.

Phenomenology explore live-in experience

experience
meaning
essence
Ethnography describe culture
analyze roles
conduct and in-depth analysis life ways
cultural behavior
Grounded Theory understand processes
discover social structures
develop social interactions
generate

Specific problems should contain the following:

 Profiling of respondents (for undergrad studies, can also be optional)

 Descriptive, comparative, or correlational statements.
 The last statement of the problem should pertain to the output question.

Statement of Null Hypothesis

 Usually seen in correlational and comparative studies only. Null hypothesis

should be used and not any other hypothesis. Simply a negative statement of the
comparative or correlational statements, stating no significant relationship or
difference of the main variables being studied.
  Should be appropriately worded with clear specification of key variables and the
study population.

 Should match with the methods used.

Significance of the Study

 Should provide significance to the profession

 Should point out the specific group of persons who will benefit from the study. To
include future researchers.

 Impact of the research on the community where the research occur. Is there
involvement of the community in decision about the conduct of the study.

 Should provide a clear statement to which findings are linked.

 Discuss issues on stigma or drainage of local capacity as well as sensitivity to

cultural traditions.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Define only the main variables of the study (refer to research title for the main
variables – dependent and independent variables). Other terms may be defined as the
researcher finds it necessary to define.

The definition should be operational. Operational definition means defining the

terms as used in the study. Conceptual definition may be used for qualitative designs
only, as in defining terms using the dictionary or other sources.
 Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

 Provide an introduction of the chapter.

 Should be at least 15 – 20 pages.
 Can be from primary or secondary sources.
 Authors should be acknowledged in every end of the paragragh.
 Should be up-to-date and based on primary sources.
 Should provide a sound basis for the new study.
 The review should provide a state-of-the-art synthesis of evidence on the problem.
 Should also observe the evidence hierarchy of designs for cause-probing
questions (lower designs must be integrated as part of the review of literature).

Related Literature

 Provide a summary of related literatures at the end of the related literatures

Related Studies

 Provide local and international studies.

 Provide a summary of related studies as the end of all the related studies

(Note: May now be combined)

 Chapter III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Introduce the chapter first.

Methods

 All designs used in the study should be explained here and include in the discussion
how the design is used in the study briefly.

Environment

 Discuss the place where the study is conducted.

 Should not be limited to the strategic location or address only but should include
the interaction of the people in the place supporting the main concepts of the
study.

Example: If in a hospital – include the mission, vision, objectives, bed-

capacity and the common cases, statistics of clientele.

Respondents or Informants (for qualitative designs)

 For quantitative studies, a table may be provided to summarize the total number
of respondents.
 For qualitative studies, a table may be provided to summarize the total number of
informants and key informants.
 Should provide for the exclusion and inclusion criteria.
 Scope and delimitations of the study may be included here.
 Discuss the inclusion (for scientific and safety concerns and of equitable
selection) and exclusion criteria (for scientific and safety concerns and of justified
exclusion) here.
 Withdrawal criteria should be stated as well. Wherein if the respondent finds the
study to be of no scientific merit or his safety is in peril, the respondent may
withdraw from the study at any time.
 Include what are the responsibilities of the participants and their expected
duration of participation in the study.
Sampling Design

o The sampling should be specified and explained as to how it is used in the study.
It should be the appropriate sampling method and technique for the study.
o The total population should be provided and the derived sampling size in figures.
o Acknowledge if Slovin’s formula is used. (useful only if respondents are 1000 or
more)
o One must provide a justification for the sample size. Should be adequate and
minimize.
o Provide measures to minimize sampling biases.

Instrument

Discuss if the tool used is:

 If a standard questionnaire, just acknowledge the questionaires’author.

 If an adaptation from the previous study – if so, please acknowledge the
author and title of the study.
 If researcher-made – Make sure that pre-testing was done or that the
research tool was content validated by three experts. Cite also relevant
sources where the tool was derived.
 There may be a need to translate the questionnaire, make sure that the
translated questionnaire also appears in the appendices.

Data Gathering Procedures

 Discuss from the time of asking permission to conduct the study up to the time that data
are being analysed and interpreted.
 Please include how participant data will be summarized (i.e. tabular form, graphical or in
paragraphs as in the case of qualitative studies.
 Provide a discussion on the private investigator’s/researcher’s qualification like relevant
certifications to ascertain capability to manage study related risks.
 Provide a discussion of the suitability of the site to make sure the adequacy of qualified
staff and infrastructure.
 Provide a discussion on specimen handling (Numbering the questionnaires and compiling
for quantitative studies. Destroying the recordings for qualitative studies).
 Provide a discussion of the length/extent of human involvement in the study.

Ethical Consideration (May be optional for quantitative studies, necessary for qualitative
studies).

Discuss the following here:

 Conflict of interest arising from financial, familial or proprietary
consideration of the private investigator sponsor, or the study site.
 Use of informed consents and the process. Discuss the principle of respect
for persons, how and when it will be done. In the case of special
populations, like minors and those not legally capacitated to give consent,
discuss how and when the consent is done and who will give consent in
their behalf.
All elements of an informed consent should be present:
1. Participant status
2. Study goals
3. Type of data
4. Procedures
5. Nature of the commitment
6. Sponsorship
7. Participant selection
8. Potential risks
9. Potential benefits
10. Alternatives
11. Compensation
12. Confidentiality pledge
13. Voluntary consent
14. Right to withdraw and withhold information
15. Contact information
 Authorization to Access Private Information – This is applicable only
when accessing patient information which can be incorporated in the
consent form or a separate form should be used. The person concerned
should sign the authorization of which it shall include (1) who will receive
the information, (2) what type of information will be disclosed, and (3)
What further disclosures the researcher anticipates.
 Privacy and confidentiality. Provide measures or guarantees to protect
privacy and confidentiality of the participant information as indicated by
data collection methods including data protection plans. Like anonymity
of the respondents, assigning numbers to respondents or informants. And
that information will be kept with strict confidentiality.)
 Ensuring confidentiality:
 Obtain identifying information (i.e. name, address) from
participants only when essential;
 Assign an identification number to each participant and attach the
ID number rather than other identifiers to the actual data;
 Maintain identifying information in a locked file;
 Restrict access to identifying information to only a few people on a
need-to-know basis;
 Enter no identifying information onto computer files;
 Destroy identifying information as quickly as practical;
  Make research personnel sign confidentiality pledges if they have
access to data or identifying information;
 Report research information in the aggregate; if information for an
individual is reported, disguise the person’s identity, such as
through the use of a fictitious name.
 Debriefing, Communications and Referrals. Should include that the
researcher should be gracious and polite and should phrase questions
tactfully, and should be sensitive to cultural and linguistic diversity. May
use the following techniques:
 Debriefing sessions – after data collection is completed this is done
to permit participants to ask questions or air complaints.
 Communication – communicate with participants after study is
completed to let them know that their participation was
appreciated. Either by mailing them a summary or advising them
of an appropriate website).
 Referrals – to appropriate health, social, or psychological services
when necessary. Like when studying about stress, participants with
high level of stress should be referred to a psychologist.
 Conflict of interest. To maintain the independence and integrity of IRB,
members of the IRB must identify, eliminate, minimize or otherwise
manage real, potential or perceived conflicts of interest. If an IRB is
reviewing a research project in which a member of the IRB has a personal
or financial conflict of interest, the member must disclose the nature of the
conflict and absent themselves from any discussion or decision regarding
that research project. In the event that a member’s conflict of interest and
necessary withdrawal from the meeting will threaten the maintenance of
quorum, the IRB can ensure that a substitute member be in attendance to
maintain quorum.
 Institutions may be in conflict of interest, for example, when they
(a) sponsor a research project; (b) manage the intellectual property
that forms the basis of a research project or stand to benefit from
intellectual property resulting from the research; (c) hold equity in
companies and/or receive major donations; or (d) have conflicting
roles carried out by one institutional official (e.g., a vice-president
who is responsible for the promotion of research activity and
funding and also for oversight of research).
 If with vulnerable populations, discuss their involvement and impact on
informed consent. (examples: children, elderly, ethnic and racial minority
groups, the homeless, prisoners, people with incurable disease, people
who are politically powerless or junior members of a hierarchial group).
 Discuss also the manner of recruitment of respondents. (Like if advertised)
 Assent. It is a term used to express willingness to participate in research
by persons who are by definition too young to give informed consent but
who are old enough to understand the proposed research in general, its
expected risks and possible benefits, and the activities expected of them as
subjects.
This is only discussed if the participants are incompetent to give consent.
Age brackets :
0-under 7: No assent
7-under 12: Verbal assent
12-under 15: Simplified assent
15-under 18: Co-sign informed consent form with parents
 Risks. Review the level of risk and measures to mitigate these risks
(including physical, psychological, social, economic), including plans for
adverse event management. Review of possible use of placebo as detailed
in the Declaration of Helsinki.
 Risk-Benefit Assessment

Major potential Benefits to participants:

 Access to a potentially beneficial intervention that might otherwise be

unavailable to them.
 Comfort in being able to discuss their situation or problem with a
friendly, objective person.
 Increased knowledge about themselves or their conditions, either
through opportunity for introspection and self-reflection or through
direct interaction with researchers.
 Escape from normal routine, excitement of being part of a study.
 Satisfaction that information they provide may help others with similar
problems or conditions.

Major potential Risks to participants:

 Physical harm, including unanticipated effects.

 Physical discomfort, fatigue or boredom.
 Psychological or emotional distress resulting from self-disclosure,
introspection, fear of the unknown, discomfort with strangers, fear of
eventual repercussions, anger or embarrassment at the type of
questions being asked.
 Social risks, such as the risk of stigma, adverse effects on personal
relationships, loss of status.
 Loss of privacy
 Loss of time.
 Monetary costs. (e.g., for transportation, child care, time lost from
work).
  Discuss the potential direct benefit to participants, the potential to yield
generalizable knowledge about the participants’ condition/problem; non-
material compensation to participant (health education or other creative
benefits), where no clear, direct benefit from the project will be received
by the participant.
 Incentives or compensation. Provide a review of the amount and method
of compensations, financial incentives or reimbursements of study-related
expenses. Declare if there is monetary consideration or if not, what are
other options in giving back to the respondents.
 Community considerations. Review on the impact of the research study on
the community where the research occurs and/or to whom findings can be
linked; including issues like stigma or draining of local capacity;
sensitivity to cultural traditions and involvement of the community in
decisions about the conduct of the study.
 Collaborative study terms of reference. If the study is collaborative in
nature in a case of multi-country/multi-institutional studies. Discuss about
intellectual property rights, publication rights, information and
responsibility sharing, transparency and capacity building.
 Permission from Ethics Committee

Statistical Treatment of Data

 Enumerate all the statistical treatment used in the study.

 Describe each statistical treatment as to how it is used in the study
 No need to provide for formulas
 Parametric interpretations are placed at the last end.
 There should be a control of the Confounding variables (aka third variables) are
variables that the researcher failed to control, or eliminate, damaging the internal
validity of an experiment.
 A confounding variable, also known as a third variable or a mediator variable, can
adversely affect the relation between the independent variable and dependent
variable. This may cause the researcher to analyze the results incorrectly. The
results may show a false correlation between the dependent and independent
variables, leading to an incorrect rejection of the null hypothesis.
 Minimize or avoid Type I or Type II errors by using the correct statistical
treatments. A Type I error occurs when a significance test results in the rejection
of a true null hypothesis. The second type of error that can be made in
significance testing is failing to reject a false null hypothesis. This kind of error is
called a Type II error. Unlike a Type I error, a Type II error is not really an error.
When a statistical test is not significant, it means that the data do
not provide strong evidence that the null hypothesis is false. Lack
 of significance does not support the conclusion that the null
hypothesis is true. Therefore, a researcher should not make the
mistake of incorrectly concluding that the null hypothesis is true
when a statistical test was not significant. Instead, the researcher should
consider the test inconclusive. Contrast this with a Type I error in which the
researcher erroneously concludes that the null hypothesis is false when, in fact, it
is true.

Analysis of Qualitative Data (For qualitative designs only)

 Discuss the type of data analysis for qualitative studies used in the study.

Criteria for Trustworthiness (For qualitative designs only)

 Explain here that the study was able to satisfy the criteria set for trustworthiness.
These are credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability.

Chapter IV
 PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Introduce the chapter first

 Presentation of data or table numbering should be based on the sequence of the statement
of the problem in the previous chapter.
 Each statement of the problem should be answered in this chapter
 Tables should be labelled accordingly and should make use of the APA format.
 Provide implications for every finding.
 Provide supporting or negating literatures or studies to every finding.

Sample table format:

See appendices for discussion of Tables in APA Format.

Chapter V
 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Provide an introduction of the chapter first.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Provide a short summary of Chapter III

Summarize the findings of the study as found in chapter IV. State only the most important
findings. NO repetition of Chapter IV.

CONCLUSION

When providing conclusions make sure to go back to the theory used in the study. Discuss the
important findings that lead to the agreement or disagreement with the concepts of the theory
used in the study. It may answer the question—“”Was the study able to prove that the theory is
true?.

RECOMMENDATIONS

 Should address the significant findings in the study.

 Seminars, trainings and the likes should be attached in the appendices.
 Provide a matrix presentation of the trainings, seminar, etc..

REFERENCES

 Should make use of the current APA Format. (Refer to APA Referencing)
 Arrange all references in alphabetical order.

APPENDICES

Should include transmittal letters, questionnaires, training/seminar, enhancement

outputs and other important documents.

CURRICULUM VITAE

 Should contain personal data only.

 Should contain a photo.
 Should be one page only.

NOTE: Format for Qualitative Studies may vary as each major theme
may be considered as one separate chapter.
 APPENDIX A
The IMRAD Research Paper Format
ENGA14 Finnish Institutions Research Paper (Hopkins)

When discussing academic writing, one often hears about the "IMRAD format."
What is this format?

IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Research [and] Discussion) is a mnemonic for

a common format used for academic ['scientific'] research papers. While used
primarily in the hard sciences, like physics and biology, it is also widely used in
the social and behavioral sciences. The IMRAD format is also known as the APA
format, as the American Psychological Association uses the IMRAD headings in
its APA stylesheet. IMRAD is simply a more 'defined' version of the "IBC"
[Introduction, Body, Conclusion] format used for all academic writing.

Research in the Humanities normally uses a style which is similar to IMRAD, in

the sense that academic research in all fields follows common explication
principles. However, the focus in Humanities research is more on readability and
the clarification of nuances in the topic, with a less-distinct separation of topic
explication and 'exact' data collection procedures than would be appropriate for
research in the hard sciences.

Further, in the Humanities generally, as well as in the ETI Section, MLA (Modern
Language Association) style is preferred over APA. There may also be 'house
styles' employed by institutions (or university departments/programs) for
publication consistency. The format used for the ENGA14 paper is a Humanities-
oriented 'house style' enhanced for readabililty and clarity of presentation in the
HTML format in which the papers will be published.

A Brief IMRAD Research Example

Following is an example of using the IMRAD format for a report based on field
research concerning the annual September "car-free day" events at Tampere
University.

The research question is: How did students at Tampere University feel about the
car-free day? Your research — based on observation, interviews and/or surveys —
will provide the data to answer the question. Your answer will be a hypothesis
(proposed thesis) that you will attempt to prove. Your data will be the evidence for
your 'proof'.

The IMRAD format would include the following basic sections, as modified to fit
the ENGA14 HTML publication standard. (NB: Some other sections, such as the
paper's Conclusion, are not included in the "IMRAD" mnemonic.)

Introduction (including a title)

The title is centered at the top of the first page.

Below the title, but without a heading of its own, is the introductory section. This
comprises one or several paragraphs which outline the research question and its
significance within the topic being discussed, making it clear what the relevance
of the question and topic are for readers of the paper.

[*Review of Background, 'Known Information']

[*This section is not part of the 'IMRAD' mnemonic, as it is considered to be self-

evident]

What is the history of the car-free day? Who sponsors it, and why? Who/what are
these organizations? How long have there been 'car-free days'? How widespread
is the concept in Tampere or Finland (perhaps as opposed to other cities or
countries)? How 'successful' have past events been (as defined by what criteria)?
In what sense might the event or its concept be controversial (in whose eyes, and
why)? (etc.)

Method

Describe how you gathered the information. What events did you observe
involving university students, teachers and staff during the car-free day? Who did
you interview? Why did you interview these particular people? What sort of
information did you expect to get from them? If you interviewed people who
didn't observe the car-free day, where did you find them? What did you expect
they'd tell you? Were attitudes of university students, teachers and staff different
from those of other residents of Tampere? In what ways? How do you know? If
your paper includes interviews or surveys, here is where you would describe their
design and procedure.

Results

What did you find out from the method you had employed? Here's where you
would include your description of the recent car-free day, and the various opinions
received by different means from different respondents. This is the main section
of your paper.

Discussion

What do the findings presented under "Results" above mean? Specifically, how do
your findings prove your thesis? What patterns do you see in the data? How do
they correlate with what had been 'known' about the event, and/or what you had
expected to find? Did you find what you had expected to, or were you surprised?
(Often the parts that surprised you are the most significant, and the most
interesting.) Is further research desirable? If so, what, and how? Researchers often
use this section to promote interest (and funding) for their next research project.

Limitations on the Research Design and Material

Often a separate subdivision of the research discussion is a description of the

limitations inherent in your research method, the material available for the
research, or other such factors. Viewed after the fact, what would you have done
differently (if you had been able to) to obtain more objective and 'reliable' results?

All research projects will have such "limitations": this does not diminish the
findings of what was discovered, confirmed or disproved with the plan and
material which was used; it simply recognizes that, had it been possible to
conduct the project differently (with more complete material, a longer time frame,
etc.) the results could or would have been different.

Conclusion, Notes, Works Cited and Appendices

While the IMRAD format presumes the paper's conclusion to be a subsection of

the Discussion, there should be a distinct closing to the paper of several
paragraphs that briefly summarize what the paper has proposed, discussed and
concluded. Following this would be (in MLA format) possible [author] Notes, the
paper's Works Cited, and possible Appendices.

FIN-1 Examples of the Optional Research Component

As examples of how past FIN-1 students have incorporated research components

into their papers, using the conceptional development illustrated above, see
(among others) Tove Jansson, The Moomin Business and Finnish Children (Räihä
2005),Media Education in Finnish Upper Secondary Schools (Silvennoinen
2005), Elk Hunting and Elk Hunters in Finland (Turunen 2006), and The
Prospective Difficulty of Integrating Islamic Immigrant Labor Into Finnish
Society (Karra 2007).
 APPENDIX B
APA FORMAT
Reference Pages in APA Format
Example of an APA Format Reference List

Some More Basic Reference Page Rules

 Your references should be alphabetized by the last names of the first author of each
source.
 All references should be double-spaced.
 Each reference should use a hanging indentation: the first line of the reference should be
flush left, but each additional line of the reference needs to be indented.
 In article titles, only the first letter should be capitalized. If a colon appears in the title,
the first letter after the colon should also be capitalized. The title should not be placed in
quotations, underlined or italicized.
 All major words in the title of a journal should be capitalized; i.e. The Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology.
 Longer works such as books and journals should appear in italics.
Journal and Periodicals in APA Format
How to Reference Journal Articles in APA Format

Electronic Sources in APA Format

 APPENDIX C
SAMPLE CHAPTER III for Qualitative Study (Phenomenological)

Chapter III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design utilized in the study. Further, the chapter lays
down the environment to which the study is to be conducted as well as the discussion of
informants and the sampling design. Lastly, this chapter includes data gathering procedures,
ethical considerations and qualitative data analysis.
Design
The study will utilize a qualitative research designs specifically the descriptive
phenomenological design since the researcher will explore the lived-in experience of the
multigravida teenage mothers in Cebu City. Then subsequently, it will gather information on
what will be the trend on their perceptions.
Environment
The study will be conducted in the capital city of Cebu, Cebu City. Cebu is
an island province in the Philippines, consisting of the main island itself and 167 surrounding
islands and islets. Cebu is one of the most developed provinces in the Philippines, with Cebu
City as the main center of commerce, trade, education and industry in the Visayas.
Based on the 2010 Census of Population and Housing (CPH), Cebu City, a highly
urbanized city in the province of Cebu, posted a total population of 866,171 persons as of May 1,
2010. This is larger by 147,350 persons compared to its total population of 718,821 persons
counted in the 2000 CPH. The increase in the population count from 2000 to 2010 translated to
an average annual population growth rate (PGR) of 1.88 percent. This is higher than the 1.65
percent annual PGR of the city between the census years 1990 and 2000.
Among the 80 barangays comprising Cebu City, barangay Gaudalupe was the most
populous with a population size making up 7.0 percent of the total population of the city. This
was followed by Tisa and Lahug (Pob.) with (4.1 percent each), Basak San Nicolas (4.0 percent),
Mambaling and Labangon (3.7 percent each), Inayawan and Talamban (3.3 percent each), and
Bulacao (3.1 percent). The rest of the barangays contributed less than 3.0 percent each.
The least populated barangay was Kalubihan (Pob.) with 0.1 percent share to the total population
of the city. It was also the least populated barangay in 2000.
Of the 860,942 household population in 2010, males accounted for 49.2 percent while
females comprised 50.8 percent. These figures resulted in a sex ratio of 97 males for every 100
females, which is similar to the sex ratio recorded in 2000 (96 males per 100 females). In 2010,
the median age of the population of the city was 24.6 years, which means that half of the
population was younger than 24.6 years. This is higher than the median age of 22.8 years that
was recorded in 2000.
Moreover, almost three in every 10 persons (29.4 percent) were under 15 years old.
Persons aged 20 to 24 years (10.9 percent) comprised the largest age group, followed closely by
those in the age groups 15 to 19 years (10.7 percent) and 0 to 4 years (10.2 percent). Males
outnumbered females in the age group 0 to 14 years. On the other hand, there were more females
than males in the age groups 15 years and over.
Informants
Ten (10) informants will be interviewed for the study or until such time that data
saturation will be reached. Of the ten (10) informants, three will serve as the key informants of
which she should have a longer experience of being a teenage mother with 3 or more years of
experience and with 2 or more children at the time she was a teenager.
Sampling Design. The sampling design that will be used in the study will be a non-
random sampling where informants will be purposively chosen based on the criteria.
The researcher will purposely select subjects who are judged to be typical of the population
under study. The informants will be limited only to those who have had experience of being a
mother while at the age of 18 years old below. The informants need not be 18 years old at the
time of the interview for as long as she experienced being a teenage mother. The motherhood
should have been experienced for over 1 year as a minimum requirement. The criteria do not
have reference to marital status whether single, married or separated, socioeconomic status, race
or color and educational qualification. Inforrnants need not speak the English language fluently.
Table 1
Informants for the Study

Study Informants Number of Informants/Key informants

Teenage mothers 7 informants; 3 as key informants

Instruments

The researcher is the main instrument of the study. The researcher will make use of an
interview guide. It will be composed of five sub-questions which will be answered narratively by
the study informants. The questions will not only be limited to what is stated in the guide.
Constant probing will be done. To facilitate correct recording of the sessions, audio recorders
will be utilized. This will assist accurate transcriptions of data.
Data Gathering Procedures
A letter of transmittal will be submitted for approval and endorsement to the Dean of the
College of Nursing and the adviser respectively. A time-table will be drafted to guide the making
of the entire study. The interview will be conducted to obtain perceptions among the informants
and key informants. The qualitative data will be collated, summarized and synthesized. Data will
be presented paragraohs according to the themes and subthemes that will emerged in the study.
The author of the study will serve as the sole investigator as she will conduct the interview alone.
The researcher will solely conduct the interviews of which she has expertise on as she is
experienced in doing interviews for her case studies in her college years. Also, from time to time,
the researcher consults with her adviser and consultant to be guided with how to go about with
the research. Despite being the sole investigator, since the researcher works in the institution
being studied, periodic gathering will be done to fully accomplish the desired output. The data
collection will start on November 15, 2015 to November 22, 2015.
No recordings will be kept as proof, all recordings will be destroyed once the study is
completely done. Proof of the interview will be the transcriptions of the interview which will be
kept in a sealed envelope. Further, informant’s participation in the study will only be answering
during the interview about their experience on teenage motherhood.
 As a summary, the researcher had a range of roles in the research study. The main role of
the researcher was to initiate, arrange and carry out the task of data collection and analysis of
data during the course of the research study. In addition, it is also the responsibility of the
researcher to analyze and interpret the data.
Ethical Consideration
The researcher will observe ethical principles in the realization of the study. In the
conduct of the study, three basic principles will be observed: the principles of respect of persons,
beneficence and justice. To be able to observe the principle of respect for persons, two ethical
convictions will be observed: first, those individuals should be treated as autonomous agents, and
second, that persons with diminished autonomy are entitled to protection. Since the study may
involve interviews involving minors, informed consent from parents or guardians will be
obtained.
In affording beneficence, respondents will be treated in an ethical manner not only by
respecting their decisions and protecting them from harm, but also by making efforts to secure
their well-being. To do this, two general rules will be observed: (a) do not harm
and (b) maximize possible benefits and minimize possible harms.
Lastly, the principle of justice. In the treatment of informants the principle of "fairness in
distribution" or "what is deserved” will be observed. To do this, the following formulation will
be observed: (a) to each person an equal share, (b) to each person according to individual
need, (c) to each person according to individual effort, (d) to each person according to societal
contribution, and (e) to each person according to merit.
Before the informants along with their parents or guardians in the case of minors, will be
interviewed, she or they will be notified about the aims, methods and anticipated benefits of the
study, her/their right to abstain from participation in the research, and their/her right to terminate
at any time his/her participation; and the confidential nature of their/her answers and replies.
No person will be made an informant of the study unless she is given the notice referred
to in the previous paragraph and provided a freely given consent that she agreed to participate.
No pressure or inducement of any kind will be applied to encourage a person to become a
respondent of the research.
The study will not entail accessing private information about the informants and thus
authorization is not required. Privacy and confidentiality will be strictly observed in the conduct
of the study. Measures or guarantees to protect privacy and confidentiality of the participant
information as indicated by data collection methods including data protection plans will be
implemented. To ensure confidentiality in the study the following measures will be afforded: (a)
identifying information (i.e. name, address) from informants will only be obtained when
essential; (b) assigning of identification number to each participant and attaching the ID number
will be done rather than other identifiers to the actual data such as informant 1, 2, or 3; (c)
maintaining identifying information in a locked file; (d) restricting access to identifying
information to only a few people on a need-to-know basis; (e) entering no identifying
information onto computer files; (f) destroying identifying information as quickly as practical;
(g) making research personnel sign confidentiality pledges if they have access to data or
identifying information; and (h) reporting research information in the aggregate; if information
for an individual is reported, disguise the person’s identity, such as through the use of a fictitious
name.
Along with being gracious and polite, the researcher will phrase questions tactfully and
will use the interview guide. A debriefing will be conducted after data collection is completed to
permit informants to ask questions or air complaints. Further, after the study, the researcher will
communicate with the informants to let them know that their participation is appreciated through
email. Lastly, referrals will be done should research findings deem it proper.
Should conflict of interest exist in the study, in order to maintain the independence and
integrity of IRB, members of the IRB must identify, eliminate, minimize or otherwise manage
real, potential or perceived conflicts of interest. If an IRB is reviewing a research project in
which a member of the IRB has a personal or financial conflict of interest, the member must
disclose the nature of the conflict and absent themselves from any discussion or decision
regarding that research project. The researcher should also be properly informed about the
matter. In the event that a member’s conflict of interest and necessary withdrawal from the
meeting will threaten the maintenance of quorum, the IRB can ensure that a substitute member
be in attendance to maintain quorum.
Informants will be chosen based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria set. No
recruitment through advertisement is needed as informants are purposively chosen. Assent will
be observed, as previously explained considering that some informants may be under 18 years
old, guardian or parental consent will be mandatorily obtained.
To minimize risks and maximize benefits in the study the following major potential
benefits will be observed in the study: (a) access to a potentially beneficial intervention that
might otherwise be unavailable to them; (b) comfort in being able to discuss their situation or
problem with a friendly, objective person; (c) Increased knowledge about themselves or their
conditions, either through opportunity for introspection and self-reflection or through direct
interaction with researchers; (d) escape from normal routine, excitement of being part of a study;
and (e) satisfaction that information they provide may help others with similar problems or
conditions. Further, the following major potential risks to participants will be eliminated: (a)
Physical harm, including unanticipated effects; (b) Physical discomfort, fatigue or boredom; (c)
psychological or emotional distress resulting from self-disclosure, introspection, fear of the
unknown, discomfort with strangers, fear of eventual repercussions, anger or embarrassment at
the type of questions being asked; (d) social risks, such as the risk of stigma, adverse effects on
personal relationships, loss of status; (e) loss of privacy; (f) loss of time; and (g) Monetary costs.
No incentives or compensation will be afforded to the informants of the study,
considering that the study is voluntary in nature and that no interventions will be introduced.
Words of gratitude will be the means of thanking the informants in participating in the study.
However, one direct benefit that will be afforded to the informants is the potential to yield
generalizable knowledge about the problem being studied or its equivalent of being a qualitative
study and non-material compensation to informants which may come in the form of information
dissemination or other creative benefits.
The study will make considerations of the community in terms of its findings, making
sure that issues like stigma or draining of local capacity will be eliminated, if not minimized.
Also making sure that cultural traditions in the community will be respected and preserved.
However, the community does not partake in making decisions about the conduct of the study.
This study is not collaborative in nature, thus, the researcher being the author holds the
intellectual property rights as well as the publication rights and information and responsibility
sharing. Thus, terms of reference will not be applicable in the study.
Analysis of Qualitative Data
Once all the qualitative data are gathered through a face to face one-on-one interview, the
next step will be to prepare the interview material for analysis. The first step is to transcribe data,
which will involve close observation of data through repeated careful listening and/or watching.
It will involve transcribing recordings into written form so that they can be studied in detail,
linked with analytic codes and/or coded. A schematic guide will be made based on the themes
identified after coding the qualitative data. In coding, data will be combined for themes, ideas
and categories and then marking similar passages of text with a code label so that they can easily
be retrieved at a later stage for further comparison and analysis. Coding the data will make it
easier to search the data, to make comparisons and to identify any patterns that required further
investigation. Codes will be based on: Themes, Topics; Ideas, Concepts; Terms, Phrases; and
Keywords found in the data. The codes will then be given meaningful names that give an
indication of the idea or concept that underpins the theme or category. Any parts of the data that
relate to a code topic will be coded with the appropriate label.
The next step is content analysis, where verbal data will be categorized for purposes of
classification, summarization and tabulation. The content will be analyzed on two levels. First is
the researcher will perform the basic level of analysis which is a descriptive account of the data:
this is what is actually said with nothing read into it and nothing assumed about it. Then a higher
level of analysis will be done--interpretative: it is concerned with what is meant by the response,
what is inferred or implied. The process will involve coding and classifying data. This is to
identify from the transcripts the extracts of data that were informative in some way and to sort
out the important messages hidden in the mass of each interview. However, the study will only
involve the first step which is giving descriptive accounts as the intention of the study is purely
descriptive in nature, no interpretative analysis will be done.
At this point the researcher will continually revisit the data and review the categorization
of data until the researcher will be sure that the themes and categories used to summarize and
describe the findings will be a truthful and accurate reflection of the data. And lastly, reporting or
communicating the findings of the study based on scientific criteria will be done. Lastly,
recordings obtained in the study will be destroyed.
 APPENDIX D
SAMPLE CHAPTER III for Quantitative Study

Chapter III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design, environment, respondents, sampling design,
instrument, the procedure in accomplishing the research as well as the statistical treatments and
the ethical considerations in the conduct of the study.
Method
The research study will make use of the descriptive correlational design. As the study
tries to determine the demographic profile along with the health risk appraisal and health-
promoting lifestyle profile of the respondents, it also assesses the relationship among the
different variables being studied, including the demographic profile of the respondents.
Environment
The study will be conducted in Talisay District Hospital (TDH), a one-storey health
facility of the DOH built in a 6,338 square meter lot at Barangay San Isidro, Talisay City, Cebu,
about 14 kms south of Cebu City. It is located along the coastal area somewhere in the South
Road Properties (SRP), a reclaimed land project connecting the cities of Talisay and Cebu. TDH
caters the health needs of Talisay City consisting of 22 barangays which has a population of
more than 200,000 residents and the adjacent municipalities in the south.
TDH is a PHIC accredited DOH national hospital directly involved in the delivery of pro-
poor and quality health care services to the community. TDH’s service capability was
categorized as a level 1 (primary) government hospital, with an approved bed capacity of ten (but
functioning at 25 – 40 bed capacity). It was in the process of upgrading to a higher service
capability level. The health services it provided include – maintenance of health or total
wellness, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases/ illnesses, and restoration of function/
rehabilitation. The diagnostic, therapeutic, and psychosocial services offered include -
diagnostic laboratory (secondary level capability), ancillary (radiology, EKG), dietary and
nutrition, dental, medical, surgical, OB- Gyne (including prenatal care), pedia, perinatal care
including newborn screening, Expanded EPI immunization, social services, and medico-legal
services.
Respondents
There are a total of 41 employees in TDH. The entire population of 41 employees will be
universally enrolled as the respondents (N = 41). The respondents had diverse qualities which
included doctors, dentist, nurses, midwives, nurse aides, medical technologists, radiology
technicians, social workers, records officers, cahiers, administrative officer, supply officer,
institutional workers, nutritionist and dietary personnel, maintenance personnel, laundry
personnel, ambulance drivers, and so forth. Since all employees are included, there shall be no
inclusion or exclusion criteria. All employees, contractual, probationary or regular will be the
respondents of the study regardless of their demographic profiles.
Should any respondent find the study to be of no scientific merit or that his/her safety is
in peril, the respondent may withdraw from the study at any time. Part of the responsibility of the
respondent includes answering the questionnaire accurately and completely for approximately 15
– 20 minutes at their most convenient time.
 Sampling Design. Total enumeration or universal sampling will be utilized in the study.
This would mean that all employees of TDH will serve as respondents of the study totaling to 41
employees. With total enumeration biases will be avoided.
Instrument
The study will make use of a questionnaire, a combination of a standardized tool and an
adaptation which was developed by the Canadian Department of Health and Welfare. The
questionnaire is composed of three parts. The first part pertains to the demographic profile of the
respondents in order to obtain information about the respondents’ age, gender, civil status,
socioeconomic status, occupation, educational attainment, number of people in the households,
and respondent’s weight.
The second part of the research instrument is adapted from the health promotional
lifestyle profile by Walker, Sechrist and Pender (1995), a standardized test that measures the
health-promoting lifestyle profile of the respondents. It is a 52-item scale questionnaire that
measures the health-promoting lifestyle of the respondent, namely: health responsibility, physical
activity, nutrition, spiritual growth, interpersonal relationship, and stress management. The items
are scored as Never (1), Sometimes (2), Often (3), and Routinely (4). Items 3, 9, 21, 27, 33, 39,
45, and 51 are items specific for health responsibility while items 4, 10, 16, 22, 28, 34, 40, and
46 are for physical activity. On the other hand items 2, 8, 14, 20, 26, 32, 38, 44, and 50 are for
nutrition while items 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, and 52 are for spiritual growth. Furthermore,
items 1, 7, 13, 19, 25, 31, 37, 43, and 49 are for interpersonal relationships. Items 5, 11, 17, 23,
29, 35, 41, and 47 are for stress management.
Part three of the questionnaire pertains to the health risk appraisal (HRA). It is an
assessment tool to assess health risk with the use of interview and a questionnaire. It is based on
the textbook of Gibson, et al. (2006) entitled Organizations, Behavior, Structure, Processes. The
HRA form was developed by the Canadian Department of Health and Welfare. It is a 35-item
questionnaire describing situations/conditions concerning a person’s lifestyle in areas such as
exercise, nutrition, alcohol use, tobacco/ cigarette use, personal health, water and road safety, and
general health. The HRA total score categorized the respondents’ health risks as - Excellent,
Good, Risky, or Hazardous. A score of 35 – 45 would mean excellent, 46 – 55 is good, while 56
– 65 is risky and 66 and above is hazardous.
The instrument may be translated into the Cebuano dialect should a respondent requires it
to be in Cebuano form.
Data Gathering Procedure
Initially the conduct of the study will commence with gathering the necessary
permits/approval letter from the university and from the hospital. Once approved, questionnaires
will be distributed to the respondents after giving consent. Data will then be collated, presented
in tabular forms and given interpretations and analyses after treating them statistically. The
author of the study will serve as the sole investigator. The researcher will solely conduct the
interviews of which she has expertise on as she is experienced in doing interviews for her case
studies in her college years. Also, from time to time, the researcher consults with her adviser and
consultant to be guided with how to go about with the research. Despite being the sole
investigator, since the researcher works in the institution being studied, periodic gathering will be
done to fully accomplish the desired output.
Completed questionnaires will not be numbered. Once data will be collated, completed
questionnaires will be compiled in a folder and be placed in an envelope and will be sealed. This
will serve as a proof of the data gathering should interested persons ask for it. Further,
respondents will only be participating in the answering of the questionnaires primarily.
The researcher had a range of roles in the research study. The main role of the researcher
was to initiate, arrange and carry out the task of data collection and analysis of data during the
course of the research study. In addition, it is also the responsibility of the researcher to analyze
and interpret the data, taking into consideration the frequency of answers in the research
questionnaire.
Ethical Consideration
The researcher had used the ethical principles in research in the conduct of the study
especially during the data gathering procedure. In the conduct of the study, three basic principles
will be observed: the principles of respect of persons, beneficence and justice. In the observance
of respect for persons, two ethical convictions will be further observed: first, those individuals
should be treated as autonomous agents, and second, that persons with diminished autonomy are
entitled to protection. In affording beneficence, respondents will be treated in an ethical manner
not only by respecting their decisions and protecting them from harm, but also by making efforts
to secure their well-being. Two general rules will be observed in the observance of
beneficence: (a) do not harm and (b) maximize possible benefits and minimize possible harms.
Lastly, the principle of justice will be applied. In the treatment of respondents the principle of
"fairness in distribution" or "what is deserved” will be observed. To further observe justice, the
following formulation will be observed also: (a) to each person an equal share, (b)to each person
according to individual need, (c) to each person according to individual effort, (d) to each person
according to societal contribution, and (e) to each person according to merit.
Before the respondent answers the questionnaire he/she is to be notified about the aims,
methods and anticipated benefits of the study, his/her right to abstain from participation in the
research, and his/her right to terminate at any time his/her participation; and the confidential
nature of his/her answers and replies.
No person will be made a respondent of the research study unless he/she is given the
notice referred to in the previous paragraph and provided a freely given consent that he/she
agreed to participate. No pressure or inducement of any kind will be applied to encourage a
person to become a respondent of the research.
The study will not entail accessing private information about the respondents and thus
authorization is not required. Privacy and confidentiality will be strictly observed in the conduct
of the study. Measures or guarantees to protect privacy and confidentiality of the participant
information as indicated by data collection methods including data protection plans will be
implemented. To ensuring confidentiality in the study the following measures will be afforded:
(a) identifying information (i.e. name, address) from participants will only be obtained when
essential; (b) assigning of identification number to each participant and attaching the ID number
will be done rather than other identifiers to the actual data; (c) maintain identifying information
in a locked file; (d) restricting access to identifying information to only a few people on a need-
to-know basis; (e) entering no identifying information onto computer files; (f) destroying
identifying information as quickly as practical; (g) making research personnel sign
confidentiality pledges if they have access to data or identifying information; and (h) reporting
research information in the aggregate; if information for an individual is reported, disguise the
person’s identity, such as through the use of a fictitious name.
Along with being gracious and polite, the researcher will phrase questions tactfully. A
debriefing will be conducted after data collection is completed to permit participants to ask
questions or air complaints. Further, after the study, the researcher will communicate with the
participants to let them know that their participation is appreciated through email. Lastly,
referrals will be done should research findings deem it proper.
Should conflict of interest exist in the study, in order to maintain the independence and
integrity of IRB, members of the IRB must identify, eliminate, minimize or otherwise manage
real, potential or perceived conflicts of interest. If an IRB is reviewing a research project in
which a member of the IRB has a personal or financial conflict of interest, the member must
disclose the nature of the conflict and absent themselves from any discussion or decision
regarding that research project. In the event that a member’s conflict of interest and necessary
withdrawal from the meeting will threaten the maintenance of quorum, the IRB can ensure that a
substitute member be in attendance to maintain quorum.
Respondents will be chosen based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria set. No
recruitment through advertisement is needed in the study as it is pure answering questionnaires.
Assent will not apply in the study considering that the respondents are all above 18 years old and
are therefore capacitated to give consent
In order to minimize risks and maximize benefits in the study the following major
potential benefits to participants will be observed in the study: (a) access to a potentially
beneficial intervention that might otherwise be unavailable to them; (b) comfort in being able to
discuss their situation or problem with a friendly, objective person; (c) Increased knowledge
about themselves or their conditions, either through opportunity for introspection and self-
reflection or through direct interaction with researchers; (d) escape from normal routine,
excitement of being part of a study; and (e) satisfaction that information they provide may help
others with similar problems or conditions. Further, the following major potential risks to
participants will be eliminated: (a) Physical harm, including unanticipated effects; (b) Physical
discomfort, fatigue or boredom; (c) psychological or emotional distress resulting from self-
disclosure, introspection, fear of the unknown, discomfort with strangers, fear of eventual
repercussions, anger or embarrassment at the type of questions being asked; (d) social risks, such
as the risk of stigma, adverse effects on personal relationships, loss of status; (e) loss of privacy;
(f) loss of time; and (g) Monetary costs.
No incentives or compensation will be afforded to the respondents of the study,
considering that the study entails only answering a questionnaire and voluntary in nature. Word
of gratitude will be the means of thanking the respondents in participating in the study. However,
one direct benefit that will be afforded to the participants is the potential to yield generalizable
knowledge about the problem being studied and non-material compensation to participant which
may come in the form or a health education or other creative benefits.
The study will make considerations of the community in terms of its findings, making
sure that issues like stigma or draining of local capacity will be eliminated, if not minimized.
Also making sure that cultural traditions in the community will be respected and preserved.
However, the community does not partake in making decisions about the conduct of the study.
This study is not collaborative in nature, thus, the researcher being the author holds the
intellectual property rights as well as the publication rights and information and responsibility
sharing. Thus, terms of reference will not be applicable in the study.
Statistical Treatment of Data
The study will utilize the following statistical formula to analyze the data collected.
Descriptive statistics will be employed to describe the population being studied. Simple
Percentage will be utilized to determine the demographic profile distribution. Weighted Mean
will be used to determine the health risk appraisal and the health-promoting lifestyle profile of
the respondent.
Further inferential statistics will be used in the study to address the issue of generalization
in the study and to make sure that Type I and Type II errors will be avoided. Chi Square,
Pearson’s Correlation and eta statistics will be used to determine the relationship between the
demographic profile and the health risk appraisal and the health-promoting lifestyle profile of the
respondents.
In order to address confounding, during the design stage: restriction, accurate
measurement of confounders will be done and during the analysis stage: stratification,
multivariable adjustment, propensity scores, marginal structural models, instrumental variable
will be employed whichever is applicable. This will be done in order to the researcher to analyze
the results correctly and to be able to correctly reject the null hypothesis.
 APPENDIX E
DISCUSSION ON TRUSTWORTHINESS IN QUALITATIVE STUDIES

Introduction

The trustworthiness of qualitative research generally is often questioned by positivists,

perhaps because their concepts of validity and reliability cannot be addressed in the same way in
naturalistic work. Nevertheless, several writers on research methods, notably Silverman, have
demonstrated how qualitative researchers can incorporate measures that deal with these issues,
and investigators such as Pitts have attempted to respond directly to the issues of validity and
reliability in their own qualitative studies. Many naturalistic investigators have, however,
preferred to use different terminology to distance themselves from the positivist paradigm. One
such author is Guba, who proposes four criteria that he believes should be considered by
qualitative researchers in pursuit of a trustworthy study. By addressing similar issues, Guba’s
constructs correspond to the criteria employed by the positivist investigator:

a) credibility (in preference to internal validity);

b) transferability (in preference to external validity/generalisability);
c) dependability (in preference to reliability);
d) confirmability (in preference to objectivity).

Although as recently as the mid 1990s Lincoln wrote that the whole area of qualitative
inquiry was “still emerging and being defined”, Guba’s constructs have been accepted by many.
This paper considers the criteria in detail and suggests provisions that the qualitative researcher
may employ to meet them. The strategies advocated are based on the experience gained by
Shenton when undertaking a qualitative PhD study devoted to the information-seeking behaviour
of school-aged children.

Credibility

One of the key criteria addressed by positivist researchers is that of internal validity, in
which they seek to ensure that their study measures or tests what is actually intended. According
to Merriam, the qualitative investigator’s equivalent concept, i.e. credibility, deals with the
question, “How congruent are the findings with reality?” Lincoln and Guba argue that ensuring
credibility is one of most important factors in establishing trustworthiness. The following
provisions may be made by researchers to promote confidence that they have accurately recorded
the phenomena under scrutiny:

a) the adoption of research methods well established both in qualitative investigation in

general and in information science in particular. Yin recognises the importance of incorporating
“correct operational measures for the concepts being studied”. Thus, the specific procedures
employed, such as the line of questioning pursued in the data gathering sessions and the methods
of data analysis, should be derived, where possible, from those that have been successfully
utilised in previous comparable projects. In terms of investigation of information-seeking
behaviour, the work of Dervin has proved particularly influential in this regard. In their study of
the information needs of Seattle’s residents, Dervin et al. initially invited participants to reflect
on situations “where you needed help... where you didn’t understand something...where you
needed to decide what to do... or, where you were worried about something”. Dervin’s
respondents then described in detail a particular instance within one of these categories. Similar
strategies have been used subsequently by Chen and Hernon, Poston-Anderson and Edwards and
Shenton amongst others;

b) the development of an early familiarity with the culture of participating organisations

before the first data collection dialogues take place. This may be achieved via consultation of
appropriate documents and preliminary visits to the organisations themselves. Lincoln and Guba
and Erlandson et al. are among the many who recommend “prolonged engagement” between the
investigator and the participants in order both for the former to gain an adequate understanding
of an organisation and to establish a relationship of trust between the parties. The danger
emerges, however, that if too many demands are made on staff, gatekeepers responsible for
allowing the researcher access to the organisation may be deterred from cooperating. The
investigator may also react with some suspicion to the notion of prolonged engagement in view
of the undesirable side effects that have been noted by Lincoln and Guba and Silverman. The
former draw particular attention to the way in which investigators may become so immersed in
the culture under scrutiny that their professional judgements are influenced;

c) random sampling of individuals to serve as informants. Although much qualitative

research involves the use of purposive sampling, a random approach may negate charges of
researcher bias in the selection of participants. As Preece notes, random sampling also helps to
ensure that any “unknown influences” are distributed evenly within the sample. Furthermore, it
may be that a random method is particularly appropriate to the nature of the investigation. The
work may, for example, take the form of a “collective case study” of the type described by Stake,
in that multiple voices, exhibiting characteristics of similarity, dissimilarity, redundancy and
variety, are sought in order to gain greater knowledge of a wider group, such as a more general
population, rather than simply the individual informants who are contributing data. This form of
research is also recognised by Hamel, Dufour and Fortin, who dub it a “macroscopic” case study,
and emphasise the importance of appropriate selection tactics if the investigator is to be
confident that informants are typical of members of a broader, “selected society”. According to
Bouma and Atkinson, “A random sampling procedure provides the greatest assurance that those
selected are a representative sample of the larger group”. A significant disadvantage of random
method, however, stems from the fact that, since the researcher has no control over the choice of
informants, it is possible that quiet, uncooperative or inarticulate individuals may be selected;

d) triangulation. Triangulation may involve the use of different methods, especially

observation, focus groups and individual interviews, which form the major data collection
strategies for much qualitative research. Whilst focus groups and individual interviews suffer
from some common methodological shortcomings since both are interviews of a kind, their
distinct characteristics also result in individual strengths. According to Guba and Brewer and
Hunter, the use of different methods in concert compensates for their individual limitations and
exploits their respective benefits. Where possible, supporting data may be obtained from
documents to provide a background to and help explain the attitudes and behaviour of those in
the group under scrutiny, as well as to verify particular details that participants have supplied.
Opportunities should also be seized to examine any documents referred to by informants during
the actual interviews or focus groups where these can shed more light on the behaviour of the
people in question. Another form of triangulation may involve the use of a wide range of
informants. This is one way of triangulating via data sources. Here individual viewpoints and
experiences can be verified against others and, ultimately, a rich picture of the attitudes, needs or
behaviour of those under scrutiny may be constructed based on the contributions of a range of
people. Van Maanen urges the exploitation of opportunities “to check out bits of information
across informants”. Such corroboration may, for example, take the form of comparing the needs
and information-seeking action described by one individual with those of others in a comparable
position. In addition, the investigator may draw informants from both users of an information
service and the professionals who deliver it. Even in a user study, where the thrust of the work is
likely to lie in analysing the ideas and experiences of users themselves, data provided by those
responsible for the management and delivery of the service under scrutiny may well prove
invaluable in order to check that supplied by the users, to help explain their attitudes and
behaviour and to enhance the contextual data relating to the fieldwork site(s). Just as
triangulation via data sources can involve the use of a diversity of informants, a range of
documents may also be employed as source material. For example, documents created
corporately by each participating organisation may be examined, as well as those relating to the
organisation but produced externally. Further data dealing with the wider context in which the
organisation is operating may be elicited from official publications. Where appropriate, site
triangulation may be achieved by the participation of informants within several organisations so
as to reduce the effect on the study of particular local factors peculiar to one institution. Where
similar results emerge at different sites, findings may have greater credibility in the eyes of the
reader. The sampling of a range of people in different organisations may be employed to provide
the diversity that underpins Dervin’s concept of “circling reality”, which she defines as “the
necessity of obtaining a variety of perspectives in order to get a better, more stable view of
‘reality’ based on a wide spectrum of observations from a wide base of points in time-space”;

e) tactics to help ensure honesty in informants when contributing data. In particular, each
person who is approached should be given opportunities to refuse to participate in the project so
as to ensure that the data collection sessions involve only those who are genuinely willing to take
part and prepared to offer data freely. Participants should be encouraged to be frank from the
outset of each session, with the researcher aiming to establish a rapport in the opening moments
and indicating that there are no right answers to the questions that will be asked. Where
appropriate, the independent status of the researcher should also be emphasised. Participants can,
therefore, contribute ideas and talk of their experiences without fear of losing credibility in the
eyes of managers of the organisation. It should be made clear to participants that they have the
right to withdraw from the study at any point, and they should not even be required to disclose an
explanation to the investigator. In many instances, such an unconditional right for subjects to
withdraw may be a requirement that must be accepted by the researcher when seeking approval
for the work;

f) iterative questioning. In addition to the “preventative” strategies outlined above,

specific ploys may be incorporated to uncover deliberate lies. These might include the use of
probes to elicit detailed data and iterative questioning, in which the researcher returns to matters
previously raised by an informant and extracts related data through rephrased questions. In both
cases, where contradictions emerge, falsehoods can be detected and the researcher may decide to
discard the suspect data. An alternative approach and one that provides greater transparency lies
in drawing attention, within the final research report, to the discrepancies and offering possible
explanations; g) negative case analysis, as recommended by commentators such as Lincoln and
Guba, Miles and Huberman and Silverman. One form of negative case analysis may see the
researcher refining a hypothesis until it addresses all cases within the data. If the study includes
the production of typologies, on completing the initial categories the investigator may revisit the
data in order to confirm that these constructs do indeed account for all instances of the
phenomenon involved, even if some of the types embrace only one instance; h) frequent
debriefing sessions between the researcher and his or her superiors, such as a project director or
steering group. Through discussion, the vision of the investigator may be widened as others bring
to bear their experiences and perceptions. Such collaborative sessions can be used by the
researcher to discuss alternative approaches, and others who are responsible for the work in a
more supervisory capacity may draw attention to flaws in the proposed course of action. The
meetings also provide a sounding board for the investigator to test his or her developing ideas
and interpretations, and probing from others may help the researcher to recognise his or her own
biases and preferences; i) peer scrutiny of the research project. Opportunities for scrutiny of the
project by colleagues, peers and academics should be welcomed, as should feedback offered to
the researcher at any presentations (e.g. at conferences) that are made over the duration of the
project. The fresh perspective that such individuals may be able to bring may allow them to
challenge assumptions made by the investigator, whose closeness to the project frequently
inhibits his or her ability to view it with real detachment. Questions and observations may well
enable the researcher to refine his or her methods, develop a greater explanation of the research
design and strengthen his or her arguments in the light of the comments made;

j) the researcher’s “reflective commentary”. In addition to the outside scrutiny discussed

above, the investigator should seek to evaluate the project, again as it develops. This may be
done through a reflective commentary, part of which may be devoted to the effectiveness of the
techniques that have been employed. The reflective commentary may also be used to record the
researcher’s initial impressions of each data collection session, patterns appearing to emerge in
the data collected and theories generated. The commentary can play a key role in what Guba and
Lincoln term “progressive subjectivity”, or the monitoring of the researcher’s own developing
constructions,which the writers consider critical in establishing credibility. Ultimately, the
section of the commentary dealing with emerging patterns and theories should inform that part of
the research report that addresses the project’s results, and any discussion in the report of the
effectiveness of the study maybe based on the investigator’s methods analysis within the
reflective commentary;

k) background, qualifications and experience of the investigator. According to Patton, the

credibility of the researcher is especially important in qualitative research as it is the person who
is the major instrument of data collection and analysis. Alkin, Daillak and White go so far as to
suggest that a scrutineer’s trust in the researcher is of equal importance to the adequacy of the
procedures themselves. The nature of the biographical information that should be supplied in the
research report is a matter of debate. Maykut and Morehouse recommend including any personal
and professional information relevant to the phenomenon under study, and Patton adds that
arrangements by which the investigator is funded should also be addressed. Any approvals given
to the project by those providing access to the organisation and individual participants should
also be made explicit;

l) member checks, which Guba and Lincoln consider the single most important provision
that can be made to bolster a study’s credibility. Checks relating to the accuracy of the data may
take place “on the spot” in the course, and at the end, of the data collection dialogues. Informants
may also be asked to read any transcripts of dialogues in which they have participated. Here the
emphasis should be on whether the informants consider that their words match what they
actually intended, since, if a tape recorder has been used, the articulations themselves should at
least have been accurately captured. Another element of member checking should involve
verification of the investigator’s emerging theories and inferences as these were formed during
the dialogues. This strategy has been employed by Pitts and is recommended by Brewer and
Hunter and Miles and Huberman. Where appropriate, participants may be asked if they can offer
reasons for particular patterns observed by the researcher. The importance of developing such a
formative understanding is recognised by Van Maanen, who writes that “analysis and
verification... is something one brings forth with them from the field, not something which can
be attended to later, after the data are collected. When making sense of field data, one cannot
simply accumulate information without regard to what each bit of information represents in
terms of its possible contextual meanings”;

m) thick description of the phenomenon under scrutiny. Detailed description in this area
can be an important provision for promoting credibility as it helps to convey the actual situations
that have been investigated and, to an extent, the contexts that surround them. Without this
insight, it is difficult for the reader of the final account to determine the extent to which the
overall findings “ring true”. Moreover, if the researcher employs a reporting system in which he
or she defines a series of types within a typology and illustrates these types using real qualitative
episodes, the inclusion of the latter enables the reader to assess how far the defined types truly
embrace the actual situations; n) examination of previous research findings to assess the degree
to which the project’s results are congruent with those of past studies. Silverman considers that
the ability of the researcher to relate his or her findings to an existing body of knowledge is a key
criterion for evaluating works of qualitative inquiry. In this respect, reports of previous studies
staged in the same or a similar organisation and addressing comparable issues may be invaluable
sources.

Transferability

Merriam writes that external validity “is concerned with the extent to which the findings
of one study can be applied to other situations”. In positivist work, the concern often lies in
demonstrating that the results of the work at hand can be applied to a wider population. Since the
findings of a qualitative project are specific to a small number of particular environments and
individuals, it is impossible to demonstrate that the findings and conclusions are applicable to
other situations and populations. Erlandson et al. note that many naturalistic inquirers believe
that, in practice, even conventional generalisability is never possible as all observations are
defined by the specific contexts in which they occur. A contrasting view is offered by Stake and
Denscombe, who suggest that, although each case may be unique, it is also an example within a
broader group and, as a result, the prospect of transferability should not be immediately rejected.
Nevertheless, such an approach can be pursued only with caution since, as Gomm, Hammersley
and Foster recognise, it appears to belittle the importance of the contextual factors which
impinge on the case. Bassey proposes that, if practitioners believe their situations to be similar to
that described in the study, they may relate the findings to their own positions. Lincoln and Guba
and Firestone are among those who present a similar argument, and suggest that it is the
responsibility of the investigator to ensure that sufficient contextual information about the
fieldwork sites is provided to enable the reader to make such a transfer. They maintain that, since
the researcher knows only the “sending context”, he or she cannot make transferability
inferences. In recent years such a stance has found favour with many qualitative researchers.
After perusing the description within the research report of the context in which the work was
undertaken, readers must determine how far they can be confident in transferring to other
situations the results and conclusions presented. It is also important that sufficient thick
description of the phenomenon under investigation is provided to allow readers to have a proper
understanding of it, thereby enabling them to compare the instances of the phenomenon
described in the research report with those that they have seen emerge in their situations. Authors
disagree on the nature and extent of background information that should be offered but few
would dispute the need for “a full description of all the contextual factors impinging on the
inquiry”, as recommended by Guba. Nevertheless, the situation is complicated by the possibility,
noted by Firestone, that factors considered by the researcher to be unimportant, and consequently
unaddressed in the research report, may be critical in the eyes of a reader. Many investigators
stop short of the course of action advocated by Denscombe that the researcher should
demonstrate how, in terms of the contextual data, the case study location(s) compare(s) with
other environments. This reluctance is based on the fact that the process would demand a
considerable knowledge of the “receiving contexts” of other organisations, and the researcher is
in no position to comment on what Merriam calls the “typicality” of the environment(s) in which
the fieldwork took place. The work of Cole and Gardner, Marchionini and Teague and Pitts
highlights the importance of the researcher’s conveying to the reader the boundaries of the study.
This additional information must be considered before any attempts at transference are made.
Thus information on the following issues should be given at the outset:

a) the number of organisations taking part in the study and where they are based;
b) any restrictions in the type of people who contributed data;
c) the number of participants involved in the fieldwork;
d) the data collection methods that were employed;
e) the number and length of the data collection sessions;
f) the time period over which the data was collected.

It is easy for researchers to develop a preoccupation with transferability. Ultimately, the

results of a qualitative study must be understood within the context of the particular
characteristics of the organisation or organisations and, perhaps, geographical area in which the
fieldwork was carried out. In order to assess the extent to which findings may be true of people
in other settings, similar projects employing the same methods but conducted in different
environments could well be of great value. As Kuhlthau and Gomm, Hammersley and Foster
recognise, however, it is rare for such complementary work to be undertaken. Nevertheless, the
accumulation of findings from studies staged in different settings might enable a more inclusive,
overall picture to be gained. A similar point is made by Gross, in relation to her work on imposed
queries in school libraries. She writes of the “multiple environments” in which the phenomenon
of her interest takes place and believes her study to provide a “baseline understanding” with
which the results of subsequent work should be compared. As Borgman and Pitts have
acknowledged, understanding of a phenomenon is gained gradually, through several studies,
rather than one major project conducted in isolation. Even when different investigations offer
results that are not entirely consistent with one another, this does not, of course, necessarily
imply that one or more is untrustworthy. It may be that they simply reflect multiple realities, and,
if an appreciation can be gained of the reasons behind the variations, this understanding may
prove as useful to the reader as the results actually reported. Such an attitude is consistent with
what Dervin considers should be key principles within information-seeking research, namely:
“To posit... every contradiction, every inconsistency, every diversity not as an error or extraneous
but as fodder for contextual analysis. To ask and re-ask what accounts for this difference or this
similarity and to anchor possible answers in time-space conceptualizings”. It should thus be
questioned whether the notion of producing truly transferable results from a single study is a
realistic aim or whether it disregards the importance of context which forms such a key factor in
qualitative research.
Dependability

In addressing the issue of reliability, the positivist employs techniques to show that, if the
work were repeated, in the same context, with the same methods and with the same participants,
similar results would be obtained. However, as Fidel and Marshall and Rossman note, the
changing nature of the phenomena scrutinised by qualitative researchers renders such provisions
problematic in their work. Florio-Ruane highlights how the investigator’s observations are tied to
the situation of the study, arguing that the “published descriptions are static and frozen in the
‘ethnographic present’ ”. Lincoln and Guba stress the close ties between credibility and
dependability, arguing that, in practice, a demonstration of the former goes some distance in
ensuring the latter. This may be achieved through the use of “overlapping methods”, such as the
focus group and individual interview. In order to address the dependability issue more directly,
the processes within the study should be reported in detail, thereby enabling a future researcher
to repeat the work, if not necessarily to gain the same results. Thus, the research design may be
viewed as a “prototype model”. Such in-depth coverage also allows the reader to assess the
extent to which proper research practices have been followed. So as to enable readers of the
research report to develop a thorough understanding of the methods and their effectiveness, the
text should include sections devoted to

a) the research design and its implementation, describing what was planned and executed
on a strategic level;
b) the operational detail of data gathering, addressing the minutiae of what was done in
the field;
c) reflective appraisal of the project, evaluating the effectiveness of the process of inquiry
undertaken.

Confirmability
Patton associates objectivity in science with the use of instruments that are not dependent
on human skill and perception. He recognises, however, the difficulty of ensuring real
objectivity, since, as even tests and questionnaires are designed by humans, the intrusion of the
researcher’s biases is inevitable. The concept of confirmability is the qualitative investigator’s
comparable concern to objectivity. Here steps must be taken to help ensure as far as possible that
the work’s findings are the result of the experiences and ideas of the informants, rather than the
characteristics and preferences of the researcher. The role of triangulation in promoting such
confirmability must again be emphasised, in this context to reduce the effect of investigator bias.
Miles and Huberman consider that a key criterion for confirmability is the extent to which the
researcher admits his or her own predispositions. To this end, beliefs underpinning decisions
made and methods adopted should be acknowledged within the research report, the reasons for
favouring one approach when others could have been taken explained and weaknesses in the
techniques actually employed admitted. In terms of results, preliminary theories that ultimately
were not borne out by the data should also be discussed. Much of the content in relation to these
areas may be derived from the ongoing “reflective commentary”. Once more, detailed
methodological description enables the reader to determine how far the data and constructs
emerging from it may be accepted. Critical to this process is the “audit trail”, which allows any
observer to trace the course of the research step-by-step via the decisions made and procedures
described. The “audit trail” may be represented diagrammatically. Two such diagrams may be
constructed. One may take a data-oriented approach, showing how the data eventually leading to
the formation of recommendations was gathered and processed during the course of the study.
This is what is typically understood by the term, “audit trail”. In addition, however, the manner
in which the concepts inherent in the research question gave rise to the work to follow may be
tracked. This more theoretical “audit trail”, which should be understood in terms of the whole of
the duration of the project, may be depicted in a second diagram.

Summary and conclusion

Over the last twenty years, much has been achieved by advocates of qualitative inquiry in
demonstrating the rigour and trustworthiness of their favoured form of

Provisions that may be Made by a Qualitative Researcher Wishing to Address Guba’s Four
Criteria for Trustworthiness Quality criterion Possible provision made by researcher

Credibility Adoption of appropriate, well recognised research methods

Development of early familiarity with culture of participating

organisations

Random sampling of individuals serving as informants

Triangulation via use of different methods, different types of informants

and different sites

Tactics to help ensure honesty in informants Iterative questioning in data

collection dialogues

Negative case analysis

Debriefing sessions between researcher and superiors

Peer scrutiny of project Use of “reflective commentary” Description of

background, qualifications and experience of the researcher

Member checks of data collected and interpretations/theories formed

Thick description of phenomenon under scrutiny

Examination of previous research to frame findings

Transferability Provision of background data to establish context of study and detailed
description of phenomenon in question to allow comparisons to be made

Dependability Employment of “overlapping methods”

In-depth methodological description to allow study to be repeated

Confirmability Triangulation to reduce effect of investigator bias

Admission of researcher’s beliefs and assumptions

Recognition of shortcomings in study’s methods and their potential effects

In-depth methodological description to allow integrity of research results

to be scrutinised

Use of diagrams to demonstrate “audit trail”

research. Nevertheless, criticisms of work of this kind continue to be made by positivists. This
paper has addressed four criteria that may be addressed by qualitative researchers wishing to
present a convincing case that their work is academically sound. A range of strategies that may
be adopted by investigators in response to these issues has been highlighted. These are
summarised in the chart below: The challenge for those involved in teaching courses in research
methods lies in ensuring that those contemplating undertaking qualitative research are not only
aware of the criticisms typically made by its detractors but they are also cognisant of the
provisions which can be made to address matters such as credibility, transferability,
dependability and confirmability. Prospective researchers can then assess the extent to which
they are able to apply these generic strategies to their particular investigation.

References

D. Silverman, Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text and interaction, 2nd ed.
London: Sage, 2001.

J.M. Pitts, Personal understandings and mental models of information: a qualitative study of factors
associated with the information-seeking and use of adolescents, PhD Thesis, Florida State University,
1994.

E.G. Guba, Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries, Educational Communication
and Technology Journal 29 (1981), 75–91.

Y.S. Lincoln, Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research, Qualitative Inquiry 1
(1995), 275–289.

A.K. Shenton, The characteristics and development of young people’s information universes, PhD Thesis,
Northumbria University, 2002.

S.B. Merriam, Qualitative research and case study applications in education, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1998.
Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, Naturalistic inquiry, Beverly Hills: Sage, 1985.

R.K. Yin, Case study research: design and methods, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994, Applied Social
Research Methods Series, Vol. 5.

B. Dervin, et al., The development of strategies for dealing with the information needs of urban residents,
phase one: the citizen study, Seattle: School of Communications, University of Washington, 1976.

C-c. Chen and P. Hernon, Information seeking: assessing and anticipating user needs, New York: Neal
Schuman, 1982 (Applications in Information Management and Technology Series).

B. Poston-Anderson and S. Edwards, The role of information in helping adolescent girls with their life
concerns, School Library Media Quarterly 22 (1993), 25–30.

A.K. Shenton, op. cit.

Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, op. cit.

D.A. Erlandson, et al., Doing naturalistic inquiry: a guide to methods, London: Sage, 1993.

Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, op. cit.

D. Silverman, Doing qualitative research: a practical handbook, London: Sage, 2000.

R. Preece, Starting research: an introduction to academic research and dissertation writing, London:
Pinter, 1994.

R.E. Stake, Case studies, in: Handbook of qualitative research, N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds,
Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994, pp. 236–247.

J. Hamel, S. Dufour and D. Fortin, Case study methods, Newbury Park: Sage, 1993, Qualitative Research
Methods Series, Vol. 32.

G.D. Bouma and G.B.J. Atkinson, A handbook of social science research, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1995.

E.G. Guba, op. cit.

J. Brewer and A. Hunter, Multimethod research: a synthesis of styles, Newbury Park: Sage, 1989, Sage
Library of Social Research Series, Vol. 175.

J. Van Maanen, The fact and fiction in organizational ethnography, in: Qualitative methodology, J. Van
Maanen, ed., Beverly Hills: Sage, 1983, pp. 37–55.

B. Dervin, An overview of sense-making: concepts, methods, and results to date, Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the International Communications Association, Dallas, TX, May 1983, URL:
http://communication.sbs.ohio-state.edu/sense-making/art/artdervin83.html.

Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, op. cit.

M.B. Miles and A.M. Huberman, Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed. California:
Sage, 1994.

D. Silverman, op. cit. 2000.

E.G. Guba and Y.S. Lincoln, Fourth generation evaluation, Newbury Park: Sage, 1989.

M.Q. Patton, Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. Newbury Park: Sage, 1990.

M.C. Alkin, R. Daillak and P. White, Using evaluations: does evaluation make a difference? Beverly
Hills: Sage, 1979 (Sage Library of Social Research Series, Vol. 76).

P. Maykut and R. Morehouse, Beginning qualitative research: a philosophic and practical guide, London:
Falmer Press, 1994, The Falmer Press Teachers’ Library: 6.

M.Q. Patton, op. cit.

E.G. Guba and Y.S. Lincoln, op. cit.

J.M. Pitts, op. cit.

J. Brewer and A. Hunter, op. cit.

M.B. Miles and A.M. Huberman, op. cit.

J. Van Maanan, op. cit.

D. Silverman, op. cit. 2000.

S.B. Merriam, op. cit.

D.A. Erlandson, et al., op. cit.

R.E. Stake. Case studies, in: Handbook of qualitative research, N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds,
Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994, pp. 236–247.

M. Denscombe, The good research guide for small-scale social research projects, Buckingham: Open
University Press, 1998.

R. Gomm, M. Hammersley and P. Foster, Case study and generalization, in: Case study method, R.
Gomm, M. Hammersley and P. Foster, eds, London: Sage, 2000, pp. 98–115.

M. Bassey, Pedagogic research: on the relative merits of search for generalisation and study of single
events, Oxford Review of Education 7 (1981), 73–93.

Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, op. cit.

W.A. Firestone, Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as applied to qualitative research,
Educational Researcher 22 (1993), 16–23.

E.G. Guba, op. cit.

W.A. Firestone, op. cit.

M. Denscombe, op. cit.

S.B. Merriam, op. cit.

J. Cole and K. Gardner, Topic work with first-year secondary pupils, in: The effective use of reading, E.
Lunzer and K. Gardner, eds, London: Heinemann, Heinemann Educational Books for the Schools
Council, 1979, pp. 167–192.
G. Marchionini and J. Teague, Elementary students’ use of electronic information services: an exploratory
study, Journal of Research on Computing in Education 20 (1987), 139–155.

J.M. Pitts, op. cit.

C.C. Kuhlthau, Investigating patterns in information seeking: concepts in context, in: Exploring the
contexts of information behaviour, T.D. Wilson and D.K. Allen, eds, London: Taylor Graham, 1999, pp.
10–20.

R. Gomm, M. Hammersley and P. Foster, op. cit.

M.R. Gross, Imposed queries in the school library media center: a descriptive study, Doctoral
Dissertation, University of California, 1998.

C.L. Borgman, The user’s mental model of an information retrieval system: an experiment on a prototype
online catalog, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 24 (1986), 47–64.

J.M. Pitts, op. cit.

B. Dervin, Given a context by any other name: methodological tools for taming the unruly beast, in:
Information seeking in context, P. Vakkari, R. Savolainen and B. Dervin, eds, London: Taylor Graham,
1997, pp. 13–38.

R. Fidel, Qualitative methods in information retrieval research, Library and Information Science Research
15 (1993), 219–247.

C. Marshall and G.B. Rossman, Designing qualitative research, 3rd ed. Newbury Park: Sage, 1999.

S. Florio-Ruane, Conversation and narrative in collaborative research, in: Stories lives tell: narrative and
dialogue in education, C. Witherell and N. Noddings, eds, New York: Teachers College Press, 1991, pp.
234–256.

Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, op. cit.

M.Q. Patton, op. cit.

M.B. Miles and A.M. Huberman, op. cit

Shenton, A. K. (2003). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.

Grove, S. K.; Burns, N. and Gray, J. R. (2013). The practice of nursing research. Appraisal, synthesis,
and generation of evidence. 7th edition. Saunders.