2018
DOI: 10.29173/cais1037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Problems and Promises of Qualitative Secondary Analysis for Research in Information Science

Abstract: Qualitative secondary analysis (QSA) is a method that has been used in other disciplines and debated from epistemological and ethical perspectives. It has rarely been explicitly used or discussed in information science. This paper explains value of the method for  information science research, discussing its benefits and  challenges and analyzing our recent QSA study.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, while the open data movement grows, the use of secondary data analysis in the area of information behaviour research is still uncommon, an emerging practice that has begun to raise questions amongst researchers. One recent example is Vanscoyet al’s (2017) paper presented at the 2017 CAIS conference in Toronto, entitled ‘Problems and promises of qualitative secondary analysis for research in Information Science’. Further, the standards, rationale and practices associated with the sharing of qualitative data in our field are even more limited, with little to guide information behaviour researchers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, while the open data movement grows, the use of secondary data analysis in the area of information behaviour research is still uncommon, an emerging practice that has begun to raise questions amongst researchers. One recent example is Vanscoyet al’s (2017) paper presented at the 2017 CAIS conference in Toronto, entitled ‘Problems and promises of qualitative secondary analysis for research in Information Science’. Further, the standards, rationale and practices associated with the sharing of qualitative data in our field are even more limited, with little to guide information behaviour researchers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%