1996
DOI: 10.5153/sro.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Qualitative Data Analysis: Technologies and Representations

Abstract: In this paper we address a number of contemporary themes concerning the analysis of qualitative data and the ethnographic representation of social realities. A contrast is drawn. On the one hand, a diversity of representational modes and devices is currently celebrated, in response to various critiques of conventional ethnographic representation. On the other hand, the widespread influence of computer- assisted qualitative data analysis is promoting convergence on a uniform mode of data analysis and representa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
131
0
19

Year Published

1999
1999
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 206 publications
(150 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
131
0
19
Order By: Relevance
“…Examples include the ways in which particular software packages impose particular coding structures on the researcher. The two most frequently cited examples of this phenomenon are the imposition of coding hierarchies in Nvivo, and the flat coding structures within Atlas-Ti that promote a grounded theory approach by the researchers who use it (Coffey, Holbrook and Atkinson, 1996;Weitzman, 2000;Willis and Jost, 1999). Certainly it would be an undesirable consequence of CAQDAS uptake if particular forms of or approaches to qualitative research were to be lost sight of.…”
Section: Using Software For Qualitative Data Analysis: Some Recent (Amentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Examples include the ways in which particular software packages impose particular coding structures on the researcher. The two most frequently cited examples of this phenomenon are the imposition of coding hierarchies in Nvivo, and the flat coding structures within Atlas-Ti that promote a grounded theory approach by the researchers who use it (Coffey, Holbrook and Atkinson, 1996;Weitzman, 2000;Willis and Jost, 1999). Certainly it would be an undesirable consequence of CAQDAS uptake if particular forms of or approaches to qualitative research were to be lost sight of.…”
Section: Using Software For Qualitative Data Analysis: Some Recent (Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Is it indeed the case that CAQDAS in some way implicitly supports and promotes a grounded theory approach to qualitative research (van Hoven and Poelman, 2003)? Certainly, the predominance of code-and-retrieve functions in early iterations of CAQDAS might be seen as encouraging a predominantly 'grounded' approach to data analysis (Coffey, Holbrook and Atkinson, 1996). Such concerns are in fact robustly countered in CAQDAS literature.…”
Section: Using Software For Qualitative Data Analysis: Some Recent (Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular it can facilitate: data reduction; systematic coding; effective searching; the analysis of large data sets; the testing of hypotheses; and the identification of negative cases (Gerson, 1984;Padilla, 1991;Fielding, 1994;Coffey, Holbrook, and Atkinson, 1996;Catterall and Maclaran, 1998;Mason, 1999;Gordon, 1999;Ereaut, 2002). Conrad and Shulamit (1984) claim that using a computer for the more mechanical aspects of the process allows the researcher to devote more energy to analytic and interpretive work.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Qualitative strategies are not automatic approaches for analysis, and therefore one must avoid falling into the error of carrying out rigid and deterministic processes, favoring mechanical action and moving away from the real work of analysis (St John & Johnson, 2000). Technology is useful for data processing and storage, and allows us to approach data heuristically (Coffey, Holbrook, & Atkinson, 1996). The use of specialized software like ATLAS.ti assists and supports analysis, extending the mental capacity for organizing, remembering and being systematic (Konopásek, 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%