[WITHDRAWN] "I Had Started to Become Complacent": The Transformative Potential of Member Checking in Qualitative Research

The value of member checking in qualitative research has been debated since being named by Lincoln and Guba (1985) as a crucial technique for adding credibility to qualitative studies. Member checking involves a process of exploring with participants to what extent the researcher’s analysis and interpretation are accurate representations of how participants experienced the phenomenon being studied (Doyle, 2007; Iivari, 2017). Scholars have praised member checking as a “clear process for negotiation of meaning to occur” (Doyle, 2007, p. 900) and criticized its potential for confusing rather than confirming participants’ accounts due to the malleable nature of subjective truth (Angen, 2000). Regardless of the type of member checking used – from a simple transcript review to a focus group or interview that presents a synthesis of study findings – it is incumbent upon researchers to justify the use of member checking, explain how it comports with their epistemology, describe methods and outcomes, and commit to practicing rigorous reflexivity (Candela, 2019).

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a member checking process between the researcher’s analysis and interpretation of participants’ individual interviews compared to their actual experiences of participating in an Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) study that examined the meaning MSW students ascribe to a course that focused on critical, engaged, and abolitionist pedagogies to develop students’ critical consciousness about structural racism.

Six semi-structured member checking interviews were conducted with MSW students at a large research university in the South who self-reported their participation in a course titled Social Work and Mass Incarceration. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling, with the researcher emailing flyers to all students who completed the course. After completing an individual interview, participants were asked three to four months later to take part in a second member checking interview to verify the researcher’s analysis and interpretation of their initial interview. At the conclusion of each member checking interview, the researcher elicited participants’ perspectives about the experience. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and transcripts were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s (2012) thematic analysis.

Based on thematic analysis of the member checking interview transcripts, three themes emerged: (1) “feeling grateful” about participating in the study and being treated as an equal in co-constructing research, (2) expanded self-reflection and self-disclosure about the experiences revealed during initial interviews, and (3) “I had started to become complacent” about thinking critically, and the member checking interview reactivated their transformative consciousness.

Findings reveal that participants’ experiences of the member checking process were more transformative than transactional. This was reflected through participants’ increased interest in research findings and expanded openness to talking about lived experiences of social and racial inequities. When qualitative researchers treat their study participants as equal partners in the research process, there is a greater likelihood of self-revelation and self-discovery by participants, which may ultimately lead to social action. Future research is needed to identify specific actions that are most likely to ensure member checking enhances the reciprocity, equality, and openness of qualitative research studies.