Lekgotla Discussion as a Decolonized Qualitative Methodology: A Lesson From a Workshop Conducted to Formulate and Verify the Strategies in Botlokwa Village,Limpopo,South Africa

Abstract

Introduction

This study used Lekgotla discussion with Batlokwa women to formulate and verify the strategies to empower the women with traditional and cultural dysmenorrhea or pain period knowledge. The Lekgotla discussion is an open forum in which indigenous communities in Sub-Saharan Africa use to debate and reach agreements on community raised issues. It has the potential to identify issues that affect community day-to-day lives and reach consensus to effect changes.

Purpose

To present Lekgotla discussion workshop as a decolonized qualitative research methodology.

Methods

The study was qualitative, using a Lekgotla discussion process among women with a variety of experience in both Indigenous and Western dysmenorrhea knowledge. Participants were purposively selected to participate in a Lekgotla discussion. The snowballing was also used, whereby the recruited participants were asked to assist in identifying and referring potential participants to the researcher, who contacted them for potential inclusion in the study. The process was repeated until a required sample was reached. A facilitator was selected by the participants to facilitate the discussion and summarizes the inputs once all the participants have raised their ideas and there was no newer information was shared. The debates and dialogues were analysed by the researcher and experts using content data analysis.

Results

The Lekgotla discussion followed a workshop process and was divided into four steps: 1) Arrival and Welcome, 2) Engaging participants, 3) Reaching consensus on the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge, 4) Verification and refinement of the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge.

Conclusion

The success of applying the process of Lekgotla discussion proved that the indigenous epistemologies are increasingly accepted to achieve research objectives.

Keywords

botlokwa decolonized kgoro lekgotla: limpopo South Africa qualitative workshop

Introduction

The Lekgotla discussion is an open forum in which Indigenous community members in Sub-Saharan Africa use to debate and reach agreements on community raised issues (Tsima, 2018). Some ethnicity groups in South Africa refer to it as “Kgoro” or traditional council gathering (Rasweswe, 2020). It has been noted that Lekgotla discussion can inform the research practices just like any other methodology as it encompasses both ontological and epistemological properties shared across the Africans descendants. It is well known that previously Indigenous communities have experienced oppression by Western researchers during research studies (Datta, 2017). Increasingly, this Indigenous communities require participatory and decolonizing research processes when they participate in a research (Held, 2019; Thambinathan & Kinsella, 2021; Pidgeon & Riely, 2021). Decolonizing research process is placing Indigenous voices and their ways of obtaining knowledge (epistemologies) in the centre of the research process (Datta, 2017).

It is evident that, scholars around the globe are challenging the widely accepted belief that Western methods and ways of knowing are the only scientifically proved methodologies to can achieve research objectives (Collin et al., 2018; Keikelame & Swartz, 2019; Rasweswe et al., 2022). According to Chilisa, (2012) certain Western research methodologies are difficult to apply in the Indigenous communities, since they are inappropriate and unacceptable. Moreover, Mertens, Cram & Chilisa, (2013) argue that researchers should recognize the frustrations of the Indigenous communities and use culturally acceptable research methodologies when studying Indigenous knowledge. Thus, taking into consideration the context specifics and use what is available and appropriate within the community. According to Evans et al. (2014), Indigenous research methodology is a research approach that use techniques rooted in the traditional and cultural knowledge of the local group under study. Such techniques enable the researchers to positively understand and appreciate realities happening within the Indigenous communities, which are not similar to Western worldviews (Keikelame & Swartz, 2019). This paper argues that Indigenous research methodology can effectively be used in a research process, because the participants can easily connect and reflect to their ways of doing. In turn, relevant and meaningful knowledge will be produced and shared.

The Lekgotla discussion was identified from the Africans and applied as a data collection method in academic research (Pienaar, 2014). Unlike the Western forms of data collection, the focus of Lekgotla discussion is on research values of respect, relevancy, ethics and responsibility shown during debates and dialogues. Moreover, it is emerging and gaining momentum to inform the research processes, especially when interacting with Indigenous populations (Mphuthi, 2015; Nare et al., 2018; Rasweswe et al., 2021). The use of Lekgotla discussion group has the potential to assist researchers to work with Indigenous community members to identify issues that affect their day-to-day lives which can be shared by various stakeholders including policy makers to effect change (Rasweswe et al., 2021). The Lekgotla discussion is a context-sensitive approach, which allows the participants to be co-researchers and the researchers to be “cultural insiders” articulating issues from the Indigenous worldview. Unlike the Western forms of reaching consensus on issues related to people lives, Lekgotla discussion follows a transformative participatory approach through open debates and dialogues among the participants until an agreement is reached. Through debates and dialogues, a large number of new ideas are generated and synthesised to solve issues and making decisions.

The Lekgotla discussion process requires direct participants involved in a non-hierarchical way and non-intimidation (Tsima, 2018). The sitting arrangement during the Lekgotla process creates the environment for the participants to listen actively, participate without fear, respect each other, and fully engage with the matters of the day. In our study, the traditional Lekgotla discussion was modified to follow a workshop process, which was divided into four steps and different sessions. The modified Lekgotla discussion guaranteed the legitimacy of the Batlokwa ethnicity ways of knowing (Rasweswe et al., 2022). The current paper forms part of a major study being conducted for PhD qualification, it presents, explains and positions the Lekgotla discussion applied in a form of workshop as a decolonized qualitative research methodology.

Methods

Research Design

The study was qualitative in nature, and used a modified Lekgotla discussion as a research process (Rau et al., 2009). The word Lekgotla is a Sepedi word used to describe a meeting in a traditional court, a council meeting or a public meeting (Tsima, 2018). In a traditional Lekgotla discussion the King or Headman chairs the meeting, then all participants takes turns to present and take a decision in resolving the issue. Instead of using the King, the current study participants selected a facilitator to chair the discussion and all present took a decision in reaching consensus (Rasweswe et al., 2022).

Sampling/Recruitment

Purposive sampling technique was used at the start to recruit the initial women participants from local schools, clinics, Traditional Health Practitioners’ associations, leaders from local authority and women’s groups based on their expertise. Since it was difficult to recruit participants for this study, a non-probability snowball sampling was also used. This involved following up the initial women participants to identify and refer potential participants who meet criteria to the researcher. Thereafter, the researcher followed up referrals, and invited them to take part in the study, and they were also asked to refer other women that meet the criteria. The initial process was repeated until there were sufficient participants to be included. All participants were recruited through face-to-face conversations, telephonic conversations and word of mouth (referrals). Most of the participants had experience from working in the Western health and education institutions such as clinics, universities, primary and high schools, located in urban and rural cultural settings. The local tribal authority recommended other women because they are recognised as experienced tribal knowledge keepers, facilitators and educators. The population, therefore, consisted of Traditional Health Practitioners, Indigenous Knowledge Holders, nurses working in the local clinic, teachers and representatives from local authorities and leaders from women’s community groups. All the participants were Batlokwa women. No sample size was drawn since Lekgotla methodology does not require any numbers for participation. Reminders for the attendance were done telephonically and by word of mouth.

Data Collection Process

The process involved experts participating in a workshop to engage in debates and dialogues centered on Indigenous dysmenorrhea or period pain knowledge. As with any rigorous research, this modified Lekgotla discussion followed a carefully designed four steps, which are described herein. 1) Arrival and Welcome, 2) Engaging participants, 3) Reaching consensus on the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge, 4) Verification and refinement of the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge.

Step 1: Arrival and welcome

All the participants were welcomed as they enter the venue individually or in groups. Most of the participants greeted and introduced themselves as they enter the venue and spontaneously started networking. The researcher introduced herself as a PhD student and her role during the discussion. The researcher’s role was not to facilitate the Lekgotla discussion, but to obtain an informed consent, clarify some activities when necessary and take field notes during the discussion. Although all the participants signed an informed consent form, they suggested a verbal consent and confirmed that in Lekgotla discussion it is allowed. However, as per university ethical approval, the researcher read and explained the informed consent to those who were unable to read and write, those participants used but expected to indicate with a cross as a form of a signature. The facilitator informed the participants that their participation is voluntary. and that they are free to discuss dysmenorrhea, as well as related issues and could withdraw from participation at any time (Polit & Beck, 2017). The steps and planned duration of each session was also shared.

Instead of setting rules for the modified Lekgotla discussion, the participants were provided with puzzle pieces to put together until there is a complete structure. This was done to observe respect, teamwork, commitment and participation among the group. In addition to arguments and disagreements during the building of the puzzle, the researcher observed divisions into smaller groups, teamwork was also observed although the group was divided. Eventually the puzzle was completed in harmony. The group started praising and laughing at the outcome. They also reflected on how they behaved during the process and laughed it out. After completing the puzzle, the researcher announced the intention of the exercise and the importance of arguing and debating to achieve better results. She also highlighted that during the formulation of strategies to empower the Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge, the same behaviour might prevail. The researcher warned the participants not to be intimidated by the arguments and dialogues. The whole exercise lasted for 45 minutes.

Step 2: Engaging Participants

This step consisted of two sessions, i) presentation of Phase 1 study findings, preliminary strategy statements and posing of the focal question, ii) debates and dialogues based on the presented information. As debates and dialogues continue, statements were written down on the flip chart by the facilitator, while the author and research assistant were taking field notes since the recording of the process was denied by the majority of the participants.

Session 1: Presentation of Phase 1 Findings and Preliminary Statements

Phase 1 study findings were presented as bulleted on the flip chart. Relevant information from the literature and characteristics of Africana Womanism Theory were also shared based on the study findings to confirm relationships. The session lasted for 20 minutes. Then the researcher posed a general question:

How can the study findings and Africana Womanism theory help to create strategies to empower the Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge?

The participants went for a 15-minute comfort break. The main intention was for them to brainstorm on the presentation and the posed question.

Session 2: Debates and Dialogues in Relation to the Presented Information

After the comfort break, the facilitator took over to stimulate a debate and dialogue. She started by summarising the process of the meeting. She repeated the focal question, followed by a provoking statement in relation to a posed question to direct the debate and dialogue. Participants took turns presenting their opinions, through the facilitator’s permission. This ensured that each member could contribute to the clarification of the opinion free from judgement and criticism. The facilitator summarised each participant’s opinion after each presentation. The process created an opportunity for the participants to discuss and match similar opinions from the pool that was generated without spending too long on a single opinion.

The frame of the dialogue was more elaborating, including how the opinion can be framed as a strategy, purpose or goal to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge. This process assisted in grouping the opinions of similar meaning according to the themes of the empirical study. The flow of discussion provided an in-depth understanding of the development of statements to qualify as either, strategies, goals and objectives. During this session, the domains of SIGN 50 were applied by the researchers to make sense of the discussion. The closure of this session was confirmed when there were no more emerging statements from the participants' opinions. This session lasted 75 minutes.

Step 3: Reaching consensus on the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge

Since, in a strategy development it is expected that stakeholders should be consulted and agree with the statements (Muller et al., 2014). To formulate the strategies to empower the Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea, some tasks were performed collaboratively with a group of experts to analyse data, evaluate and recommend the strategies. The field notes were shared with the facilitator and the experts, whereby what was missed by the facilitator was added on the flip chart.

The experts discussed and compared the raised opinions to the preliminary strategy statements raised in step 2. When the opinions were compared with the preliminary strategy statements, relationships were established between the opinions and preliminary statements. Thereafter, the experts jointly selected the most appropriate statements found relevant and culturally acceptable to their context. The purpose was to include all the necessary information needed for the draft strategies. It was also to get cultural understandings of dysmenorrhea with the intent of transitioning the findings into various strategies. The author and research assistant worked together with the participants in overseeing the process.

After a joint effort by the experts to scrutinise and compare the opinions and preliminary statements, a mutual agreement was reached to summarise the available information into strategies deemed relevant to empower the Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge. Whilst some of the information was considered, activities were required to achieve the strategies. The strategic goals and objectives emerged from the discussion and were checked if they addressed the themes and sub-themes of the empirical study, as well as the literature and Africana Womanism theory integration. This session lasted for 1 hour and 30 minutes.

Step 4: Verification and refinement of the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge

The proposed strategies were written on a flip chart and then presented to the experts to subject them to the final scrutiny. It was also to complement the proposed strategies with inputs from their respective perspectives and findings from the empirical study. The experts were asked to confirm the final statements and rate each of the developed strategies on perceived importance, clarity, applicability, validity and reliability. The instructions to guide the ratings were: 1) How important are each of the strategies in the empowerment of Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge; 2) how clear is the formulated strategy; 3) and how applicable it is to implement each of the strategies in empowering Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge; 4) how valid will the strategy assist in empowering Batlokwa women; 5) how reliable is the strategy in producing similar results if applied in similar circumstances. The experts were requested to rate each strategy according to the Linkert scale privately and provide suggestions and recommendations where necessary for the reformulation of the strategy.

Exact instructions on how to use the evaluation tool were given to the experts. Each strategy statement was to be scored on one to four Likert point scale as stated herein: 1 = irrelevant, totally not important, clear and applicable; 2 = unclear, importance and applicability questionable; 3= important, clear and applicable but needs reformulation; and 4 = extremely important, clear and highly applicable. The criteria tool also had a space for comments and suggestions. See Table 1. The experts were also requested to reformulate, add or remove statements from the draft strategies. As such, discussion concepts were scrutinised, ideas and knowledge were reconstructed through verification and refinement. Time was allocated for the experts to complete the criteria tool.

After completion, each participant was requested to share her scoring and suggestions whilst the facilitator was writing it on the flip chart. Thereafter, the facilitator and research assistant collected the evaluation tools from the experts for confirmation and statistical data analysis. The points against each response were indicated on a flip chart. Scores for each strategy were added up, and the final order of responses’ scoring was grouped and calculated. Each participant knew immediate results in response to the evaluation of the strategies as the exercise was conducted openly.

Scores that registered 4’s were accepted, the 3’s and 2’s were re-formulated, and the 1’s were deleted. Most of the evaluators scored 4, and few strategies registering 3’s were re-formulated based on the suggestions and comments, where there was a repetition of strategies, the repeated one was deleted. There were no 2’s and 1’s. The reformulated strategies were added to 4’s and reflected as the final refined strategies. To reach consensus, a summary sheet indicating the agreement was prepared with the refined and agreed upon strategies as a form of feedback, and put on a flip chart. After reaching the consensus, there were no shortcomings indicated. The experts commented that the proposed strategies are relevant and address the plan to inform the Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge (practicality). They all confirmed that the strategies are clear, specific and achievable as objectives. This step ensured the practicality and quality of the proposed strategies. Therefore, the result was a refined set of strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge. This step lasted 45 minutes.

Table 1.

Scores and evaluation criteria for developing strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge.

Scores	Evaluation Criteria	Comments/Suggestions
4	Extremely important, clear and highly applicable
3	Important, clear and applicable, but needs reformulation
2	Unclear, important and applicability questionable
1	Irrelevant, totally not important, clear and applicable

Data Analysis

Data analysis was ongoing guided by the responses from the debates (content analysis). The analysis started from step 2 (session 2) until step 4 when the experts were confirming the final statements included as strategies. The process of qualitative involved the participating women identifying, sorting, comparing, categorisation, building and reaching consensus on acceptable strategy statements. As debates and dialogues continue, statements were written down on a flip chart by the facilitator, the author and research assistant shared the field notes, which were matched and the omissions were added on the flip chart before they started with scrutiny. As the experts were scrutinizing the statements on the flip chart findings emerged, appropriate, relevant and acceptable statements were selected by the participants to be included for voting and ranking. Consensus on inclusion of the statements for the objective-referenced strategy was reached in the workshop. Data analysis is discussed in step 2 and step 3. The verification and refinement of the strategies to empower Batlokwa women with dysmenorrhea knowledge were through a four Likert point scale using SIGN 50 criteria.

Discussion

The Lekgotla workshop was designed for the experts to engage in debates and dialogues to formulate and verify the strategies to empower women with Indigenous dysmenorrhea knowledge. In this study, the Lekgotla discussion process was modified to suit the type of the study that was conducted, in which the facilitator was not a leader but selected by the participants. There is a nascent recognition of the suitability of Lekgotla to direct workshops in any given situation as it attends to the state of quality in problem solving. For example, Lekgotla is continuously used to facilitate workshops for coaching managers (Tsima, 2018). The experience with Lekgotla workshop showed required qualities to conduct research with Indigenous communities (Rasweswe, 2020). Furthermore, it is widely accepted in South Africa to guide several government gatherings and meetings such as State of the Nation Address (SONA), because it has potentials of bringing the government closer to the people. The data produced by Lekgotla discussion workshop can be qualitative or quantitative, or both (mixed methods) depending on the way it is used (Tsima, 2018; Rasweswe, 2020). In support, Chilisa and Tsheko (2014) argue that Indigenous research process can produce both qualitative and quantitative methods.

The current paper report on qualitative method and acknowledges that the traditional Lekgotla discussion may vary according to its use or/and a setting, in particular community’s culture and tradition. For instance, a particular sequence or arrangement of events to manage activities as followed in the traditional “Kgoro” or traditional council gatherings practiced for many years at Botlokwa village. Just like in the current study, COMETSA Lekgotla workshops follow certain steps to maintain order when mentoring leaders (Tsima, 2018). This implies that the Lekgotla process can be adapted in any setting and modified depending on its use. In addition, the advantages of using Lekgotla workshop in the current research allowed participation of the whole cohorts or representative groups of participants without limitations. It also generated greater and creative ideas from various participants (Tsima, 2018). Therefore, it facilitated deep thinking, creativity, listening, flowing dialogue and consultation to everyone input before decisions are made. These add value towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) number 10, which advocates for reducing inequalities within and among countries, such as ways of generating knowledge and effectively solving societal issues. These inequalities are rooted in a history of colonization and oppressions that are experienced by the Indigenous peoples (Chilisa, 2012; Smith, 2012).

The central argument in this paper is that decolonizing research process should be considered to cater for the issues of culture, cultural competence, respect, power, trust, ethics and recognition of individual and communities. It is important to espouse the Indigenous research methods because it allows the colonized to view understand themselves through their own worldviews (Chilisa, 2012).

During the Lekgotla workshop, the participants respect each other opinions and ideas. In their debates and dialogues, there is no interruption, as a participant who is on the floor is given time to finish sharing the idea, before the other one can be given opportunity (Tsima, 2018). In this regard the participants are allowed to agree or disagree with the shared ideas. The facilitator summarizes their inputs once all the participants have shared their opinions and ideas before a resolution can be taken (Rasweswe, 2020). Therefore, the Lekgotla workshop environment facilitate critical thinking, communication and listening skills as it engages all the participants in a dialogue.

Additionally, the Lekgotla workshop promotes meaningful, interpersonal disclosures among participants by gathering equally weighted responses. When Lekgotla discussion workshop guides the research process, results are produced immediately, since ideas are generated, debated and evaluated at the session (Nare et al., 2018). Tsima, (2018), argues that Lekgotla discussion workshop offers a fair and valid representation of decolonizing research processes and match it to the cultural standing, as well as group views since all participants have an equal voice, and all responses to the posed question have equal validity. The verification of the decisions taken, and discussions are made until everybody is satisfied. The sitting arrangement in a Lekgotla workshop is a circle, implying that all participants’ ideas are equal including the facilitator and promoting togetherness as a principle of Ubuntu (motho ke motho ka batho). The participants of Lekgotla proceedings arrive at the venue earlier than the scheduled time, for greetings and knowing each other as the Lekgotla process is embedded in the culture of Ubuntu.

Understanding the process involved, social boundaries and ethics that govern the use of Lekgotla discussion method may be strengthened and appreciated by other researchers. The successful use of Lekgotla as a workshop in the current study proves that an effective efforts to strengthen the appropriateness of applying Indigenous methods of knowing when conducting research with the previously oppressed need to be identified and recognized globally (Chilisa, 2012). The efforts will allow the previously oppressed to view and understand themselves through their own worldviews (Chilisa, 2012). The Lekgotla discussion just like any other Indigenous research method may be modified and be used by Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers alike (Chilisa et al., 2017).

Rigor

Rigor during Lekgotla discussion is maintained through various means. The participatory nature of Lekgotla discussion workshop influences data gathering and analysis activities, this addresses the issue of researcher bias. The debates and dialogues during Lekgotla discussion prolong time spend with the participants for credibility. Credibility is also ensured by probing and clarifying correctness of the information with the group during debates and dialogues (member checking). The open forum nature during Lekgotla discussion encourages the participants to provide fair and faithful realities, which address the authenticity issues. The process in which Lekgotla discussion is conducted facilitate deeper reflection on the unique knowledge, this enables the participants to think more critically about their social context over an extended period of time, which is positively impacting the content of the data.

Conformability and dependability are addressed by the realization of the sample because the method allows a large number of participants from the community. The nature in which the Lekgotla discussion is facilitated, encourages the code recode procedure, whereby there is a high chance of analyzing data with the participants.

Ethics

Ethical approval to conduct the study was granted through the Human Research Ethics Board at the University of Pretoria prior to data collection protocol number 20/2018. Prior to recruitment of participants permission was obtained from the local authority leadership. The reason was to ensure that the study is conducted in a manner that is acceptable to the community customs. All the participants signed informed consent in order to participate in the study. However, the participants mentioned that in Lekgotla discussion verbal consent is accepted and it is witnessed by all the participants present, because anyone who is not agreeing with the terms of the participation is free to leave the meeting.

Limitations

The challenge that brings to this paper is that Lekgotla discussion is relatively recent to academic research. However, the work taken from the few available literature have provided important guidelines to outline the process of collecting data using Lekgotla discussion. It is also difficult to ensure and maintain anonymity during Lekgotla proceedings because it is an open discussion forum.

Conclusion

The paper share what was learned from the workshop proceedings, in which the author assumes would be a useful contribution to informing the decolonising research methodologies process. The importance and processes followed in adopting Lekgotla discussion as a method of data collection during formulation and verification of strategies are clearly outlined. The Lekgotla discussion was found to be a very useful method to provide a voice, recognition and power to the previously disadvantaged communities. Adopting it when conducting research, especially in rural communities will reduce hierarchal order that currently exists between researchers and participants. However, it should be noted that the Lekgotla discussion is still emerging as a process of conducting research, the understanding of Lekgotla shared here will be expanded further in future publications.

Implications

Even though the Lekgotla workshop outlined here was positioned to South African setting, we expect it to be applicable in other African countries and useful in other settings globally. The information raised by the participants on obtaining verbal consent during Lekgotla discussion is crucial and support indigenous approaches in conducting research. However, it is important for the researchers to include a script of on how to initiate and maintain a verbal consent when obtaining ethical approval from institutions.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The author appreciate the continuous support from the PhD study supervisors.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

Informed Consent

All the participants signed informed consent in order to participate in the study.

ORCID iD

Melitah Molatelo Rasweswe

References

Chilisa

(2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Sage publications.

Chilisa

Major

T. E.

Khudu-Petersen

(2017). Community engagement with a postcolonial, African-based relational paradigm. Qualitative Research, 17(1), 326–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117696176

Chilisa

Tsheko

G. N.

(2014). Mixed methods in Indigenous research: Building relationships for sustainable intervention outcomes. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(1), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689814527878

Collin

Koskey

(2018). Protecting the right to exist as a people: Intellectual property as a means to protect traditional knowledge and Indigenous culture [Paper presentation]. In Wellness & Healing: Indigenous Innovations & Alaska Native Research. Alaska Native Studies Conference, Anchorage, Alaska. 2018.

Datta

(2017). Decolonizing both researcher and research and its effectiveness in Indigenous research. Research Ethics, 1(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117733296

Evans

Miller

Hutchinson

Dingwall

(2014). Decolonizing research practice: Indigenous methodologies, aboriginal methods, and knowledge/knowing. In Leavy

(Ed), The oxford handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 179–191). Oxford University Press.

Held

M. B. E.

(2019). Decolonizing research paradigms in the context of settler colonialism: An unsettling, mutual, and collaborative effort. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918821574

Keikelame

M. J.

Swartz

(2019). Decolonising research methodologies: Lessons from a qualitative research project, cape town, South Africa. Global Health Action, Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1561175

Mertens

D. M.

Cram

Chilisa

(Eds), (2013). Indigenous pathways into social research: Voices of a new generation. Left Coast Press.

10.

Mphuthi

D. D.

(2015). Anti-viral properties of wildeals (Artemisia afra) and wynruit (Ruta graveolens) as combination therapy and its effects on the renal system. PhD thesis. North-West University.

11.

Muller

Bezuidenhout

Jooste

(2014). Health services management (3rd ed.). Juda and company Ltd.

12.

Nare

N. E.

Pienaar

Mphuthi

D. D.

(2018). Conceptualisation of African primal health care within mental health care. Curationis, 41(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.4102/curationis.v41i1.1753

13.

Pidgeon

Riely

(2021). Understanding the application and use of indigenous research methodologies in the social sciences by indigenous and non-indigenous scholars. International Journal of Education Policy & Leadership, 17(8), 11. https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2021v17n8a1065

14.

Pienaar

A. J.

(2014). African Indigenous Methodology in Qualitative Research: The Lekgotla, A holistic approach of data collection and analysis intertwined.

15.

Polit

D. F.

Beck

C. T.

(2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

16.

Rasweswe

M. M.

(2020). The Indigenous perspective of the meaning and treatment modalities of dysmenorrhea among the Batlokwa women of Limpopo province, South Africa. Unpublished. PhD Thesis. University of Pretoria.

17.

Rasweswe

M. M.

Peu

M. D.

Mulaudzi

F. M (

(2022). The importance of local language in healthcare: Naming and defining dysmenorrhea. Journal of Communication in Healthcare. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2022.2094690

18.

Rasweswe

M. M. M.

Peu

M. D.

Mulaudzi

F. M.

(2021). The indigenous meaning of dysmenorrhea: Using modified photovoice to document perspectives of traditional health practitioners (THPs) and indigenous knowledge holders (IKHs) (F1000Research). https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.53908.1

19.

Rau

du Toit

Mavhungu

Kabeta

(2009). Media leadership strategies from southern Africa. Sol Plaatje Institute for Media Leadership. Southern Africa Institute for Media Entrepreneurship Development.

20.

Smith

L. T.

(2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indi- genous peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books.

21.

Thambinathan

Kinsella

E. A.

(2021). Decolonizing methodologies in qualitative research: Creating spaces for transformative praxis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211014766

22.

Tsima

P. S.

(2018). The Lekgotla way learning and developmental methodology. COMETSA GoC International (Pty) Ltd.