Conducting Member Checks With Multilingual Research Participants From Diverse Backgrounds

The veracity of qualitative research is typically measured according to well-established principles of trustworthiness. Adhering to these principles demonstrates that findings are the result of a rigorous methodology and that findings accurately describe the experiences of participants. Member checking is one strategy often utilized to ensure the credibility of the findings, while also generating a valuable opportunity for research participants to actively participate in the analytic process. However, there is limited guidance as to how to conduct member checks that are culturally and contextually relevant to all research participants, particularly if data has been collected in multiple languages with diverse participants. In these instances, researchers must remain vigilant to avoid excluding the voices of participants or designing member checks that might not be culturally and contextually responsive. This article describes a technique — utilizing “I-poems” — as an innovative way to conduct the member checking process with a diverse group of survivors of intimate partner violence who participated in a longitudinal evaluation of the services they received. This inclusive and innovative member checking process was found to be a culturally relevant way to maximize participation, minimize power imbalances, and invite research participants to become active partners in the analytic process.

The veracity of qualitative research is typically measured according to wellestablished principles of trustworthiness. Adhering to these principles demonstrates that findings are the result of a rigorous methodology and that findings accurately describe the experiences of participants. Member checking is one strategy often utilized to ensure the credibility of the findings, while also generating a valuable opportunity for research participants to actively participate in the analytic process. However, there is limited guidance as to how to conduct member checks that are culturally and contextually relevant to all research participants, particularly if data has been collected in multiple languages with diverse participants. In these instances, researchers must remain vigilant to avoid excluding the voices of participants or designing member checks that might not be culturally and contextually responsive. This article describes a techniqueutilizing "I-poems" -as an innovative way to conduct the member checking process with a diverse group of survivors of intimate partner violence who participated in a longitudinal evaluation of the services they received. This inclusive and innovative member checking process was found to be a culturally relevant way to maximize participation, minimize power imbalances, and invite research participants to become active partners in the analytic process.
Qualitative research is typically measured according to the following wellestablished principles of trustworthiness: 1) credibility, 2) dependability, 3) confirmability, and 4) transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985;Morse, 2015). Adhering to these principles demonstrates that findings are the result of rigorous methodological procedures and accurately describe the experiences of participants (Morrow, 2005). Qualitative researchers usually employ a variety of techniques to ensure the trustworthiness of their studies, such as audit trails, reflexivity, triangulation, and member checking. Audit trails and reflexivity journals typically involve careful documentation of methodological decisions and researchers' biases and assumptions (Merriam, 2009). However, details regarding member checks are frequently missing from published qualitative studies.
When conducting qualitative research with multilingual and multicultural participants, it is critical to maximize trustworthiness by thoughtfully and ethically collecting and analyzing data (Carlson, 2010). Member checking is a useful way to ensure that the analysis and interpretation of the data adheres to trustworthiness principles (Merriam, 2009). Further, member checking resonates with participatory approaches as it acknowledges that participants hold valuable knowledge and can be integral to the analysis and interpretation of research findings (Caretta & Pérez, 2019).
While member checking may be considered inherently participatory as researchers seek input on analysis and interpretation directly from participants, method selection and design play a fundamental role in fostering active participation (Foster-Fishman et al., 2005). Corroborating accuracy through dialogue and consensus building with participants is not only consistent with participatory approaches (Caretta & Pérez, 2019), it also provides opportunities to maximize the trustworthiness of the study. When selecting specific member checking activities, researchers must carefully consider participants' cultural and contextual realities to ensure that those activities establish credibility, foster active and meaningful participation, and are not harmful to participants (Hallett, 2012).
In this article, we describe a way of including participatory principles within the analytic phase of a longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation with diverse survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) and present a member checking process that attended to participants' contextual needs. We sought to use a participatory process for member checking that would help ensure the accuracy of our interpretation of the qualitative findings by using a technique that could be conducted in a participatory and democratic way (Vaughn & Jacquez, 2020). As such, we selected a creative, engaging, and inclusive member checking technique to present data collected in two languages to survivors of intimate partner violence who participated in a longitudinal evaluation of the services they received.

Member Checking in Qualitative Inquiry
Member checking is the process sharing interview data and/or preliminary findings with research participants to verify the trustworthiness of the data (Doyle, 2007). Lincoln & Guba (1985) described member checking as a crucial process to establish credibility in qualitative research, given its focus on verifying the accuracy of descriptions of participants' accounts and narratives. However, member checking covers a variety of activities, ranging from returning the transcripts of interviews to participants to sharing synthesized findings (Birt et al., 2016). Further, member checking can be an individual process or can take place with multiple participants in a focus group setting (Doyle, 2007). It can also differ in level of formality and number of sessions conducted (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Although multiple activities may be utilized as member checks in qualitative research, there is limited information as how to determine which member checking activity is best suited to enhance the trustworthiness of the data. In practice, these decisions are often based on researchers' epistemological and ethical considerations, as well as methodological constraints and possibilities (Birt et al., 2016). However, there is limited guidance on the process of conducting member checks in effective and inclusive ways. In fact, it is common for qualitative researchers to mention their use of member checks as evidence of the credibility of their findings without describing the details of the member checking activities or their rationale for selecting such activities  (Birt et al., 2016;Simpson & Quigley, 2016). Such absence of detail may be an indication of ineffective member checking strategies when engaging with research participants.

Multilingual and Multicultural Participants in Qualitative Research
Research with multicultural and multilingual participants requires additional considerations to ensure that data is collected, analyzed, and disseminated in inclusive and accurate ways. However, there is scarce guidance that delineate how to integrate inclusive and equitable principles and strategies when working with a culturally and linguistically diverse sample. It is therefore critical for researchers to be aware of the implications of some key methodological decisions. For example, it is possible that the research team may lack the cultural knowledge and language skills to collect, analyze, and interpret findings in a culturally responsive way. Additionally, if data is collected in multiple languages, but the research team lacks the language skills to analyze the data in multiple languages, the data may need to be translated to English prior to analysis. Although a common practice, there are some risks that must be considered. Most importantly, investigators may erroneously see research findings as originating from a homogenous sample, and thus silence, distort, or misinterpret participants' voices and perspectives (López-Zerón et al., 2020).
Further, when considering member checking activities, it is important for researchers to be intentional about the design of the member check and their recruitment and engagement strategies. Scholars interested in integrating participatory approaches to their research may consider the degree of participation in the methodology and the possibility of adapting traditional methods or techniques to be more participatory (Vaughn & Jacquez, 2020). In keeping with these considerations, member checking activities may be designed to be more participatory by centering participants' culture, context, and language. It is also important to not only consider the cultural relevance of the member checking strategy for all participants, but locations, need for food, transportation, and incentives for participation. These contextual considerations will likely maximize participation and inclusivity, challenge some of the traditional ways of conducting member checking, and may help avoid some of the issues that arise with some traditional member checking techniques, such as losing sight of participants' needs and prioritizing researcher convenience (Carlson, 2010).

Artistic Research Methodologies
A continuum of epistemologies is evident in research approaches that include the arts. Arts-based research systematically applies the arts thoroughly to the research process in all phases (Gerber et al., 2020). In contrast, artsrelated research can be defined as research that uses some aspect of the arts to "emphasize or exemplify certain aspects of participant data and/or results" (Gerber et al., 2020, p. 6). Numerous research methodologies using the arts have been utilized to increase engagement and maximize participation among research participants.
Artistic methodologies have been used across disciplines as a promising approach for exploring the human experience without relying on traditional methods of inquiry (Gerber et al., 2012(Gerber et al., , 2020McNiff, 2011;Vaccaro, 2020). Arts-based research comprises multiple forms of knowledge (e.g., sensory, kinetic) and knowing (e.g., creative expression) and posit the aesthetic experience at the center of the research process (Eisner, 2006). These approaches expand the analytic possibilities and overcome reductionist claims to truth based on objectivity (Gerber et al., 2012(Gerber et al., , 2020. As Gerber and colleagues suggested (2020), arts-based research provides tools to retrieve personal and collective histories relevant to better understand people's perceptions, behaviors, and discourses. Thus, research methodologies that utilize the arts may be used to systematize participants' experiences as a collective, assuming that its complexities are better communicated through artistic means of expression.
Artistic approaches may also promote methods that are accessible through participatory collaboration (Gerber et al., 2020), demonstrating their potential for working with diverse communities of participants. For instance, arts-based think tanks were utilized with women experiencing long-term homelessness to ensure that the findings and subsequent advocacy efforts reflected the priorities of the women involved (Vaccaro, 2020). Photovoice, a method that involves individuals taking photographic images to document and reflect on issues important to them, has also been effectively utilized across interdisciplinary qualitative research with diverse populations (Catalani & Minkler, 2010).
Arts-based techniques can be used to evoke perceptual levels of cognition, engage participants' imaginations, and elicit a dialogue in which individual or collective narratives can be crafted (Eisner, 2006). Thus, various creative arts techniques and approaches can be implemented to meet research objectives. For example, Iida (2016) argued that writing poetry can help individuals reflect on their own experiences and explore their personal lives. Additionally, poetry has been used as a creative artistic technique to effectively synthesize longitudinal data and represent individuals' voices over time (Koelsch, 2015). Specifically, I-poems, a tool rooted in feminist qualitative inquiry, have also been used across disciplines and topics, including sibling relationships (Edwards & Weller, 2012), the health and experiences of disabled cyclists (Inckle, 2020), and unwanted sexual experiences (Koelsch, 2015). Although the use of I-poems has exclusive been as a tool to analyze individual narratives, there is empirical support for arts-related research approaches to member checking collective narratives (Gerber et al., 2020).
Clearly, the choice to include artistic methods or techniques may occur throughout the research process, ranging from a fully systematic arts-based research epistemology to an arts-related method that occurs after data collection or analysis. For the current study, we implemented a creative member checking strategy, grounded in the empirical support for arts-related research approaches with diverse populations. In the following sections, we will provide a brief description of a recent evaluation of services for survivors of intimate partner violence conducted in English and Spanish. We will also describe an artistic member checking strategy to illustrate a process that is inclusive, and contextually and linguistically responsive, that also enhances the trustworthiness of the study.

Current Study Brief Overview of Longitudinal Study
As part of a statewide evaluation of housing services for survivors of intimate partner violence, we conducted a mixed-methods longitudinal evaluation with survivors receiving services in a large metropolitan city in the west coast of the US. The 36 survivors enrolled in the evaluation ranged in age from 22 to 57 years old. The majority of survivors (89%) identified as female and heterosexual. Most of survivors in the sample were Latinx (78%), five participants were African American or Afro Caribbean, and three participants were multiracial. Slightly over half of survivors (58%) reported Spanish as their primary language.
Survivors were interviewed four times across a nine-month period, with interviews conducted every three months. During the interviews, detailed qualitative information was collected about survivors' backgrounds, housing and safety obstacles, and services received over time. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, depending on preference, with about half the sample preferring Spanish. Participants were paid $50 for each of the interviews. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained through [Michigan State University].

Member Checks
Toward the end of the data collection procedures, the research team had multiple conversations about conducting inclusive member checks. Since member checks may involve sharing raw transcripts with participants, informally sharing preliminary themes, or creating flyers/presentations with synthesized data (Birt et al., 2016), the team considered a variety of member checking activities. While multiple activities may serve to ensure the trustworthiness of the data, not all may be appropriate for participants. In fact, some strategies may cause distress or harm research participants. As Carlson (2010) documented, some participants may be very uncomfortable reading the transcript of their personal narratives. For survivors of gender-based violence who shared traumatic experiences during their interviews, it may be distressing to review an emotionally charged transcript of their interview (Hallett, 2012). As such, the research team determined that presenting de-identified synthesized data was most appropriate as it would decrease the possibility of triggering participants' trauma and would center the focus on the main aim of the study: the evaluation of the housing services received.
Additional conversations were had to ensure that the member checking process also considered cultural and linguistic needs. First, it was important to determine whether to do the member checks individually or in a group format, as well as in person or over the phone. After an initial discussion, the

Conducting Member Checks With Multilingual Research Participants From Diverse Backgrounds
Journal of Participatory Research Methods research team determined it would best to ask participants their preferences. Therefore, during the final interview, interviewers asked participants whether they would be interested in a group session to discuss preliminary findings and provide feedback. The vast majority of participants shared their enthusiasm for the possibility of meeting with the research team and were particularly excited about connecting with fellow participants. Given their enthusiasm and interest, the research team determined that a single in-person group session would be the best strategy to share findings. Further, because the majority of participants reported having a strong relationship with the organization and would feel comfortable returning despite not receiving services, the meeting was held in one of the organization's private conference rooms.
The research team then considered a few member checking strategies. During this process, it was important to design a member check that would be culturally, contextually, and linguistically responsive to the realities of participants in the sample. After preliminary analyses of the longitudinal data, the research team developed an understanding of participants' needs and preferences. Throughout the data collection process, several participants reflected on the importance of connecting with others while in services, particularly through artistic activities. As one participant shared, "The art groups were helpful because they're more concentrated on art rather than the issues. We're talking and expressing ourselves but doing it in an art group setting. It was really helpful and creative." Therefore, the research team aimed to create a member check that reflected participants' desire for connection, but one that was also inclusive and accessible for participants from diverse backgrounds, literacy levels, and language needs.

I-poems
Rather than sharing full transcripts, interview fragments, or data summaries, the research team, led by the second author, decided to utilize Ipoems to synthesize the data by timepoint as the member checking technique for this investigation (Brown & Gilligan, 1992;Edwards & Weller, 2012;Gilligan, 2015;Simpson & Quigley, 2016). The I-Poem is an artistic tool used in qualitative data analysis to organize, synthesize, and present data during analysis. I-poems are created by using participants' first-person accounts to construct a summary of the data and are particularly useful for capturing changes and trajectories over time (Edwards & Weller, 2012). Further, I-poems have been used as a creative member checking strategy at the individual level to present longitudinal data without burdening participants with long transcripts or narratives (Simpson & Quigley, 2016).
The research team determined that the I-poem tool was an appropriate member checking activity for the current study for a number of reasons. First, this approach enabled researchers to present the data in a concise, accessible, and contextually responsive way. At the time of the member checking activity, study participants were no longer receiving services and all reported increased housing stability, financial stability, and overall well-being. However, participants also shared feelings of isolation and a desire to connect with others

Conducting Member Checks With Multilingual Research Participants From Diverse Backgrounds
Journal of Participatory Research Methods since services had ended. Given this context, utilizing I-poems for a member checking activity promoted a creative and inclusive way to present the longitudinal data that would also foster connection among participants. Second, this tool allowed flexibility to present participants' trajectories over time by creating one stanza to represent themes from each time point using participants' own words. Although participants developed different and unique narratives to make sense of their individual experiences, selecting short phrases from multiple participants allowed individual narratives to come together as one collective narrative (Eisner, 2006). The I-poems were therefore designed so that participants could interpret the themes for themselvesrather than being explicitly told what they were -and confirm if their experience was accurately reflected.
Finally, the use of short verbatim phrases extracted from participants' interviews to construct the I-poems minimized the risk of breaching confidentiality in a group setting or triggering participants' trauma by having to read detailed testimonies that may have included references to abuse.
The research team decided to retain data in the original language it was collected throughout the analytic process to avoid translations that may misrepresent participants' voices and experiences. Thus, the research team created one I-poem in English and one in Spanish (poema-yo) using verbatim statements. That is, the research team did not modify, edit, or translate participants' statements in any way. In fact, data collected in Spanish was analyzed and presented to participants in Spanish, and the same for data collected in English.
During the analytic procedures, the research team created brief narratives for each timepoint that summarized the themes that emerged. The summaries were intended to integrate the main recurring themes into a cohesive narrative. To construct the I-poems, the second author extracted all "I statements" from participant interviews (i.e., phrases using "I" in English and "yo/me" in Spanish to account for all first-person statements) using the timepoint summaries as a guide to select the statements that best reflected overall themes. Then, two lists were generated for each timepoint, one containing statements in English and one in Spanish. The second author carefully crafted the poems to best reflect the most salient themes represented at each timepoint, while also creating a cohesive narrative throughout the poems. Before finalizing the poems, multiple research team members read and discussed the poems to ensure coherence and accuracy (see Table 1).
For both I-poems, each stanza represented a data collection timepoint, while the overall poem reflected participants' experiences and trajectories over time. For instance, the first interview contained a number of historical questions about their experiences, particularly regarding their experience working with a housing advocate. Thus, the themes represent reflections of their experiences at that time. To illustrate that process, first person accounts were used in the first stanza of the Poema-yo to represent a sense of loss and readiness to seek help to overcome that loss:

I -poem (English) and Poema-yo (Spanish) I -poem (English) and Poema-yo (Spanish)
*Note: In Spanish, statements beginning with "yo" and "me" were utilized in the construction of the poems to account for all first-person statements.
1. Create brief data summaries for each timepoint synthesizing major themes. 2. Read 74 longitudinal transcripts in English to identify all "I" statements & read 66 longitudinal transcripts in Spanish to identify all "yo/me" statements. * 3. Utilize data summaries for each timepoint as a guide for selecting illustrative I and yo/me statements. 4. Create I-poems by crafting each stanza to represent the themes for each timepoint, while reflecting participants' trajectories with the poem as a whole. 5. Reread I-poems and data summaries to ensure that the poems accurately reflect each timepoint. 6. Finalize I-poems as a team.

Yo ya soy una sobreviviente (I'm a survivor already)
Me quitaron todo (They took everything from me) yo sentía que estaba en un hoyo (I felt I was inside a hole) yo estaba perdida (I was lost) yo no quiero que eso se vuelva a repetir (I don't want this to happen again) Similarly, during the six-month follow up interview, participants expressed feeling more confident about their ability to maintain their housing without agency financial support. To illustrate that overall theme, the following Istatements were selected from multiple participants: I was told okay well, your time's expired I said okay I've learned I don't need to depend on other people

Member Check Procedure Participants
Most participants completed all four interviews (92%). All 33 participants who completed the final interview were invited to a member checking focus group that occured about eight weeks after the completion of the last interview. Of the 33 participants, one declined, 14 could not be reached due to changes in their contact information or inability to connect with them over the phone, and five were unavailable to attend the member checking focus group due to scheduling conflicts (e.g., vacation, work, previous commitment). Of the 13 participants who confirmed their participation, ten attended the member checking focus group session. Half of the participants identified Spanish as  their preferred language and the rest preferred to communicate in English or both. All participants were offered childcare and $25 for their participation in the member check. Continental breakfast was provided during the session.

Member checking focus group
The first and third authors led the session, while another member of the research team took detailed notes during the group discussion. Following language justice principles (Antena Aire, 2014), a bilingual space was offered throughout the entire session by providing consecutive interpretation for both languages. That is, interpretation was provided after a participant expressed themselves in English or Spanish. This process ensured that all participants were able to express themselves in the language they felt most comfortable and proficient, while also understanding others who chose to speak in the other language represented in the room.
The session began with a brief summary of the longitudinal evaluation and introduction to the I-poems. The facilitators described the process of creating the I-poems and read both poems out loud to the whole group, including consecutive interpretation so that all participants understood the thematic  Introduced member checking process to participants 2. Facilitator read out loud "I-Poem" (in English) and "Poema-yo" (in Spanish). Sequential interpretation was provided for monolingual speakers. 3. Participants were asked to individually code each statement in the poem: green if the statement represented their experience or pink if the statement did not represent their experience. Bilingual participants were provided with the option to code both the "I-Poem" and "Poema-yo. " 4. Once all participants completed the activity, they displayed their highlighted poem on the wall. Participants then walked around the room noticing similarities and differences between highlighted poems. 5. Facilitator led a group discussion on the content of the poems, whether they represented their personal experiences, and any other reflections participants had about their experience in the agency and with the research study. Participants expressed themselves in their preferred language. Interpretation was provided.
similarities between both poems. The facilitators then distributed the poems to participants. Bilingual participants had the option to take both poems, regardless of the language they chose to be interviewed in during the data collection process. Participants were then asked to individually code the poems by using a green highlighter to mark the lines that resonated with their experience and a pink highlighter to mark the phrases that did not (See Table  3 for more details). Once all participants completed the coding, poems were displayed on the wall and participants walked around, noting differences and similarities (See Figure 1). The visual experience of seeing all the marked poems was useful for participants to share and immediately observe their level of agreement with each other, regardless of the I-poem language. In total, 85% of the lines were highlighted in green by all participants, corroborating that the findings were mostly reflective of participants' experiences. Figure 2 displays participants' highlighted I-poems as a visual report of the member checking results.
The facilitators then led a group discussion where participants reflected on their personal experiences, if the poems reflected those experiences accurately, and whether anything was missing. Being able to visually see the level of agreement or disagreements among participants helped generate a deep discussion on common experiences and whether disagreements represented something completely untrue about their experience, untrue during a specific time period, or a different degree of truth. The discussion organically became a conversation among participants themselves as they reflected on each stanza. Participants also offered general reflections regarding their experiences with the agency and with their participation in the evaluation project. After the discussion, participants were invited to use the back of their poems to write down any reflections and/or feedback about the member checking process itself.

Participants' feedback about the member checking process
Participants were enthusiastic about the member checking activity. They reported appreciating the extent to which the I-poems reflected their experiences with the agency. Further, the majority of participants provided feedback about their experience in the member check. Several participants expressed feeling that they felt deeply connected with the poems, as though they were taken from their individual narratives, as one Spanish speaking Participants also reflected on individual lines in the poem that resonated with them. For example, many participants reflected on the I-Poem line that stated, "I wish I could have lived there a little longer." Both English-and Spanish-speaking participants who initially lived in a shelter or in transitional housing expressed feeling like they were not ready to exit. As one participant shared during the member check discussion, "I didn't feel ready to go out into the world." Participants also reflected on the line in the Poema-yo that stated "me gustaría tener un nuevo hogar [I would like to have a new home]." Several participants discussed how strong this sentiment was during their time at the agency; as one participant succinctly noted, "One thing is to obtain [housing] and the other is to maintain it." Participants also reflected on the similarities and differences between the I-poem and Poema-yo. Those who coded both poems expressed feeling that the Poema-yo felt "more spiritual," allowing all participants to connect to the poem in a more profound way.
Finally, at the end of the session, participants offered written feedback on their experience with the evaluation, including the member checking activity. Participants were overwhelmingly satisfied with the evaluation and found that the member checking activity provided closure. One participant shared, "Les quiero agradecer por tomarme en cuenta para participar…me gustó ver a las otras participantes hoy [I'd like to thank you for considering me for [this project]…I really liked seeing other participants today]." Another participant wrote, "This experience [member check] helped me really let out how I have felt. Being with others who felt the same way provided me a type of closure…it felt good to share." Offering a bilingual space maximized participation among this diverse sample of participants. It also allowed participants to connect with each other seamlessly, regardless of the language they preferred to communicate in. Participants not only reflected on how the member check provided the closure and connection they needed, but also corroborated the research team's interpretations of participants' trajectories and narratives. Discussion As noted by participants in this study, the member checking process can be a powerful way of providing closure for participants of a longitudinal study. Effective member checks not only ensure the trustworthiness of the findings, but they also provide an opportunity for participants to reflect on their participation in the research process. As part of member checking activities, participants may explore themes in more detail and discuss the themes they considered most important. To establish rich and meaningful member checking processes, researchers must carefully and intentionally design the member checks, while considering the inclusivity and responsiveness of the activities. In this study, the member checking activity was selected given participants' reflections during the data collection process that suggested that arts-based methods were particularly engaging and effective at encouraging communication among participants. This level of intentionality is critical in participatory research to foster trust and collaboration between participants and researchers. A foundation of trust sets the stage to build a genuine partnership that allows participants to voice their reactions, perspectives, and disagreements with the themes generated from the data analytic process.
In utilizing an artistic member checking technique, such as the I-poem, researchers may facilitate a process that is engaging and inclusive. As Lincoln & Guba (1985) identified, and the current study supported, the member check has the potential to be an inclusive participatory tool. Consistent with previous research, the I-poem allowed participants to see their individual changing voices emerge over time (Edwards & Weller, 2012). Further, the I-poem is not only an effective technique in member checking activities involving individual narratives (Koelsch, 2015;Simpson & Quigley, 2016), but may also be used in member checking activities involving collective narratives. As a program evaluation, our goal was to understand participants' experiences in a housing program for survivors of intimate partner violence as a collective, not just their individual experiences. Therefore, by selecting I-statements from various participants, we were able to create two changing collective narratives -one in English and one in Spanish -that reflected participants' experiences in the housing program. The successful use of the I-poem technique in member checking collective narratives suggests that it may also be useful to researchers conducting similar investigations, including program evaluations.
It is also essential to consider participants' contextual realities throughout the entire research process to promote a close partnership and in turn, a rich and participatory member checking process. This is of particular importance when conducting research with multilingual and multicultural survivors of intimate partner violence. For example, ensuring language access is necessary to protect research participants from further victimization. In research, language access refers to providing research participants with all research materials in their preferred language (Antena Aire, 2014). However, language considerations must go beyond the translation of materials to ensure that participants' voices and experiences are accurately documented. It is important to establish procedures that allow participants to engage and communicate in the language they feel most comfortable, proficient, and powerful (López-Zerón et al., 2020). In other words, language needs must be considered during the design of the research process and throughout the data collection and analytic procedures. Language is often closely tied to culture (Antena Aire, 2014). Therefore, it is particularly important to ensure that the analytic process accounts for cultural and contextual nuances in the data when working with diverse multilingual participants.
Although the current study illustrated the design and implementation of a member checking activity with bilingual participants, these considerations may be generative for other research studies across multiple languages. Researchers working with multilingual participants may consider retaining the data in the language it was collected throughout the analytic process, including during member checks. Researchers may also consider designing a member checking process that encourages effective dialogue and promotes equity among languages. Further, conducting member checks in a way that is sensitive and meaningful provides an opportunity for all participants to become active participants of the research process and discuss the themes and experiences that were salient to them, including anything that might have been misinterpreted or that might be missing.

Limitations and Future Directions
Although the member checking activity described was culturally and linguistically responsive, effective, and well-received by participants, it is important to identify key limitations. The purpose and process of this member checking activity was to verify the research team's interpretations of participants' trajectories and experiences with receiving services from a domestic violence agency. However, only a single session was conducted during the course of the investigation due to time and budgetary constraints. This limited participation and the opportunity to discuss individual themes in more detail. In addition, not all research participants were able to attend the member checking session. Conducting multiple member checks throughout the analytic process, perhaps after preliminary analysis of each timepoint, would have offered more opportunities for participants to verify findings and interpretations.
One of the strengths of this study's member checking approach was the use of an artistic technique to maximize engagement and participation. Most participants described their desire for connection during the data collection process and several explicitly expressed a strong interest in arts-based activities. However, this decision to synthesize the data using I-poems was made within the research team without direct input from participants. Integrating participants' input earlier in the process would strengthen the participatory aspect of the analytic process.
As previously mentioned, it is critical to be intentional about the process of designing and implementing member checks when working with diverse multilingual participants to ensure that findings are interpreted accurately. There is also a clear need for researchers to report on why a specific member checking strategy was selected, provide details on the decisions made throughout the process, and document participant responses to the findings. When working with multilingual participants, researchers must account for diverse language needs, and those considerations and decisions should also be reported. We encourage researchers to consider the ways in which they can adapt participatory approaches or techniques throughout the stages of research, even when they may be limited by traditional research designs. We also suggest that researchers gather information about participants' responses to the member checking activities, including their perspectives on whether it was an effective strategy to confirm the accuracy of findings. This level of transparency increases the trustworthiness of the study, while also providing much needed guidance for other researchers aiming to replicate and/or adapt existing member checking activities to best fit their investigation and participants.
Finally, current findings indicate that a member checking process that centers the cultural and contextual needs of participants may go beyond enhancing the trustworthiness of a study. Such a member checking activity may contribute to participants' wellbeing and provide them with closure when participating in a longitudinal study. Thus, a thorough, culturally and contextually responsive member checking process may strengthen the research process, its findings, and facilitate a positive and affirming experience for research participants.