2005
DOI: 10.1080/16066350500102237
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using multiple coders to enhance qualitative analysis: The case of interviews with consumers of drug treatment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
105
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 160 publications
(105 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
105
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After receiving feedback on these initial categories and their definitions from two reviewers, I enlisted a colleague unfamiliar with the dataset to analyze the data independently using the constant comparative approach. Previous research attests to the benefits of using multiple analysts at this point in data analysis (Berends & Johnston, 2005). We met to review and compare one another's categories, offer feedback on them, and discuss possible definitions.…”
Section: Procedures and Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…After receiving feedback on these initial categories and their definitions from two reviewers, I enlisted a colleague unfamiliar with the dataset to analyze the data independently using the constant comparative approach. Previous research attests to the benefits of using multiple analysts at this point in data analysis (Berends & Johnston, 2005). We met to review and compare one another's categories, offer feedback on them, and discuss possible definitions.…”
Section: Procedures and Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Our approach enabled team members to share individual impressions of the interviews, cross-check the coding of the data, and collectively refine the interview guide and coding scheme. Our experience aligns with evidence that team approaches to qualitative research can enhance methodological rigour of design, analysis, and interpretation (Barry et al, 1999;Berends & Johnston, 2005). Compared with individuals working alone, teams can better establish a standardized coding process with enhanced accuracy (Delaney & Ames, 1993), incorporate different perspectives (Liggett, Glesne, Johnston, Hasazi, & Schattman, 1994), and bring the analysis to a richer level of conceptual thinking and interpretation (Barry et al, 1999;Oleson, Droes, Hatton, Chico, & Schatzman, 1994).…”
Section: Strengths Of the Qualitative Team Approach To Directed Contementioning
confidence: 89%
“…Two primary analysts reviewed the coding of all 22 interviews for five of the 10 main coding categories and cross-checked their coding according to the final coding scheme. Coding agreement between analysts was not essential; rather, group discussion led to heightened data interrogation and added thoroughness to the analysis (Barry et al, 1999;Berends & Johnston, 2005). Group discussion can result in team reflexivity where members share their experiences, assumptions, and interpretations, dually enhancing intellectual rigour as well as team morale (Barry et al, 1999).…”
Section: Strengths Of the Qualitative Team Approach To Directed Contementioning
confidence: 99%
“…When multiple coders are used, additional time is required. In addition, each researcher has preferences in interpretation of data (Berends and Johnston, 2005). These partialities can be valid, but are often dependent on the coder's understanding of the context.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%