100%(12)12 out of 12 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 2 out of 2 pages.
most of those who have not signed one avoided the study all together (Bortz et al., 2014).Using confidential, nonrandom, purposive sampling with cultural diversity and differing lengths of incarceration provided unique insight and strengthened the credibility of the study. Constant comparison approach was used to analyze data which increased dependability of the results. Two of the research team members have experience working in correctional facilities. Confirmability was difficult due to some participants being release from prison before the study was completed. All of the participants were from the same facility so the application of this study to other facilities or ones with less security is hard to determine. The length of incarceration may affect the results of the study and was not a variable considered in this study (Dinkel & Schmidt, 2014).Identify the legal and ethical concerns for each article, including informed consent and IRB approvalThe Tel Aviv University Ethics Committee approved the study. “The questionnaire began with an explanation of the study aim, the nature of the respondent’s contribution to the research, and the manner in which the information would be used. The respondents were told that their participation in the study was entirely voluntary and that all information would re- main confidential. Their agreement to answer the questions was viewed as consent to participate in the study.” (p. 27)The study was approved by the university International Review Board (IRB) and the state Department of Corrections (DOC). Dueto requirements, one inmate was trained and served on the IRB for the study. Identification was protected and all inmates provided written, informed consent (Dinkel & Schmidt, 2014).