Validity
AMM
LENS
Several measures were taken to strengthen “credibility, authenticity, criticality, and integrity,” identified by Whittemore et al. as primary validity criteria in qualitative research [ESM and MCM further improved the validity of findings by accounting for their “positions” as researchers [ESM identified and deconstructed subjectivity elements. Collecting data gave her an intuitive sense of code definitions, which needed to be more explicitly stated for the second coder. She was also the sole observer and interviewer. Her prior fieldwork for her MSc in medical anthropology may have stimulated a search for cultural or socioeconomic rationales for emotional connection differences amongst dyads. Her experience in anthropology may have narrowed the lens of study design. The research team discussed these potential biases and sought to account for them in the analytical process, with AMM and MCM adding contrasting perspectives for codebook generation and analysis of observations and interviews respectively.MCM identified the following subjectivity issues: her personal experiences as a childcare provider for families with varying levels of emotional connection; professional experiences with parent–child dyads in the US and Latin America; and public health coursework for her MPH that favors responsive care to enhance child development. This may have led to postulations about the intervention’s positive impact, as well as assumptions about parenting approaches based on mothers’ cultural backgrounds.To minimize the intrusion of these subjectivity factors during analysis, both researchers acknowledged initial hypotheses and prior knowledge while generating codes [