There are different views on what triangulation is, just as there are
different views on what intention to treat analysis is. These lead to some
emotionally laden debates.
Of course some definitions are more widely accepted than others, but I think
the one promulgated by Giacomini and Cook is in the user's guides is a good
one. To summarise, triangulation is about different takes on the data. This
does not necessarily involve using different qualitative methods, but rather
different methods of interpretation. For instance investigator triangulation
involves using two or more investigators to review and create categories
from the data. The point of the exercise is not I think to increase
objectivity, but to increase the credibility of the categorisations and
thus enhance the trustworthiness of the process.
Triangulation does pose difficulties for people using phenomenological
methods, as it seems the investigator is in fact the method. But this
shouldn't stop the use of different data sources in addition to the people
interviewed to check with categories/themes are present.
Andrew Jull
HRC Foxley Fellow
Clinical Trials Research Unit
University of Auckland Tel: +64 9 373-7599 ext 4743
Private Bag 92016 Fax: +64 9 373-1710
Auckland Mobile: 021 173-7755
New Zealand Email: [log in to unmask]
CAUTION: This email message and accompanying data may contain information
that is confidential and subject to legal privilege. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, or copying
of any part of this message and accompanying data, is prohibited. If you
have received this message in error, please notify me immediately and delete
this email message from your computer. Thank you. Please also note that this
message may have been intercepted and modified by unknown third parties
prior to its receipt by you.
|