When snowball sampling leads to an avalanche of fraudulent participants in qualitative research

Background Fraudulent research participants create negative consequences for the rigour and soundness of research. Aims A case study is presented from a qualitative study where the research team believed several fraudulent participants fabricated information during an interview about being a caregiv...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of older people nursing 2023-11, Vol.18 (6), p.e12572-n/a
Main Authors: Sefcik, Justine S., Hathaway, Zachary, DiMaria‐Ghalili, Rose Ann
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Awareness
Caregivers
Dementia
Financial incentives
Fraud
Humans
Infections
Interviews
Motivation
Qualitative Research
recruitment
research participant registry
Rigour
Snowball sampling
Teams
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Fraudulent research participants create negative consequences for the rigour and soundness of research. Aims A case study is presented from a qualitative study where the research team believed several fraudulent participants fabricated information during an interview about being a caregiver for a person living with dementia and chronic wounds. Materials & Methods Participants were recruited through a free online research registry. Individual semi‐structured interviews were held virtually. Results The study was paused after the nurse scientist with qualitative methodology experience identified that participants were giving illogical and repetitive responses across interviews. The team developed a revised screening tool to help reduce fraudulent participants from enrolling in the study. None of the data collected were used for analysis. Discussion Information is provided on how the team dealt with the situation, lessons learned for future studies, and recommendations for gerontological nurse researchers. Conclusion Researchers should be aware that some participants are misrepresenting themselves for financial incentives and this can compromise the soundness of findings. Thorough screening tools are one way to identify and prevent fraud.
ISSN:1748-3735
1748-3743
DOI:10.1111/opn.12572