![]() ![]() This method stands close to the grounded theory approach. Here, the researcher identifies text segments within interview transcripts and arranges texts until a reduced summary reveals. observation, introspection, and media content analyses as supplementary methodologies. This means, that the database can be bigger and more diverse, thus, more challenging from an analytical perspective.Įditing is the hermeneutical approach of the ‘60s. Here the researcher involves however not only focus group discussions or in-depth interviews but other information too into the analysis, thus e.g. This research strategy is not different from the template method from the aspect of coding. You are ready when you coded your whole data successfully, and then you can continue with phrasing your findings. The codebook can be modified or some codes can be even deleted if they seem to be inappropriate. Where you can identify the segments based on the ‘a priori’ codes, you can code them as such. Coding is the process of detecting these themes and attaching labels to index them. You will search for relevant perceptions, and experiences also called as ‘themes’ within the texts. This coding method is predominantly a deductive, or top-down type of coding in the sense, that you start with a set of codes, however, it makes deductive and inductive analysis both possible.Īfter having an initial codebook, the first step is reading through the data, and marking the segments that provide answers to the research questions. The template method usually uses hierarchical coding, including broad themes encompassing successively narrower, more specific ones. During the process, you narrow, expand or merge your initial code set to get the final template. It is a flexible but structured technique, where you use an ‘a priori’ coding template, usually based on a subset of your data that you revise and reapply (King, 2012). The template organizing style uses a codebook that contains relevant categories and themes according to an already identified theoretical perspective. Gibbs (2007), instead of data-driven or open coding, you can apply concept-driven coding.īenjamin Crabtree and William Miller (1999) offer different techniques in their book, Doing qualitative research, to code and analyze qualitative data: Instead of the grounded theory approach, more structured and formal analytical schemes are necessary. Here you have already some idea about the investigated phenomena and the relationships between the variables, and the qualitative phase is about seeking explanations (it is called explanatory research design). For example, in the case of a mixed-methods design, you might start with a quantitative strand, and test the initial hypothesis based on quantitative data. However, sometimes we have quite definite research questions. Grounded theory methods enhance not only the researcher’s theoretical sensitivity, but provide an opportunity to develop broad open questions. It is especially fruitful if we enter the research field without significant previous literature. It required a fully open approach and a flexible coding strategy.Īlthough ‘grounded theory’ is an excellent, well-structured, and precisely defined qualitative approach to discovering new constructs and enriching existing theories, it is one of the best methods to explore and understand a topic in a context. The first part of this series was about the logic of grounded theory coding, where the point was to emerge new theories out of qualitative data. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |