Women's Decision-Making And Factors Affecting Their Choice Of ...

investigation have for the participants involved in the study, as well as the context
within which the study was conducted (Lincoln and Guba 1985). Truth-value is
demonstrated by showing that the multiple constructions of those involved in an
investigation have been adequately represented, and that the reconstructions
arrived at in the inquiry are credible to the constructors or participants in a study.
A description developed through the inquiry in a particular setting must ring true
for those who are members of the setting. People in a given setting will perceive
different constructed realities, therefore, a credible outcome is one that adequately
represents both the areas in which the realities converge, and the points on which
they diverge (Denzin and Lincoln 1994; Erlandson, Harris, Skipper et al 1993).
It is argued that a credible inquiry has a mosaic image on its readers, by being
imprecise in terms of defining boundaries and specific relationships, but rich in
providing depth of meaning and richness of understanding (Erlandson, Harris,
Slcipper et al 1993).
Participant check for trustworthiness of findings has been recommended
by some authors (Beck 1993; Guba 1981; Guba and Lincoln 1985; Guba and
Lincoln 1989; Sandelowski 1986). According to the recommendation, analyses of
findings are given back to participants in a study to judge their adequacy, and the
ultimate test of validity lies in isomorphism between a study's findings and
participants' perceptions. Member checks are intended for correction of errors of
fact and interpretation, for obtaining additional information, for putting the
participant on record for having agreed that the results are correct, for
summarising the findings, and for judging the overall adequacy of the study
(Guba and Lincoln 1989).
However, some researchers have disputed the use of participants to check
for trustworthiness of findings (Bloor 1983; Bryman 1988; Emerson 1988;
80