What Do Participants Think of My Work?

This article explores the use of member checking in two qualitative analyses—reflexive thematic analysis and voices and I-positions analysis—within my doctoral research. Member checking is framed as a flexible methodological strategy to enhance credibility, support co-construction of knowledge, and promote ethical engagement with participants. In the thematic analysis, I used focus groups and visual materials to share preliminary findings, fostering collective discussion and reflection. This process allowed me to validate interpretations, add nuances, and address overlooked dimensions such as structural racism and intra-family caregiving dynamics. For the voices and I-positions analysis, I applied dialogical member checking interviews, enabling participants to engage with my interpretations of narrative fragments and voice relationships. The findings highlight member checking as a versatile methodological and ethical tool, balancing interpretive authority, promoting participatory analysis, and increasing accessibility of results. Member checking is most effective when adapted to the analysis type, research design, and participant characteristics.