An Overview of the Most Commonly used in Analyzing Qualitative Data

Content Analysis Overview

Content analysis is a commonly applied analytical method in social science today. Social scientists use it to analyze writings, artifacts and recorded audio for meanings in speech. Themes, characteristics, and speech and writing patterns are identified for scientists to know the core reasons for communication (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). A coding method is used in a textual context, identifying texts of interest to the coder/researcher. Texts of interest are isolated and then studied to give meaning to being communicated. Of interest in this analytical method is the precision and consistency with which texts are treated. Social scientists study texts and words used without considering the speakers' contexts.

Narrative Analysis Overview

In narrative analysis, the assumption is that people use stories to explain what happens in their daily lives (Gilbert, 2008). Social scientists have therefore used the method to analyze case studies and surveys relevant to their research topics. People sharing their stories through art, photographs, and interviews, among other ways, is taken by social scientists as an opportunity for description and interpretation. Subjects chosen for studies are not purposefully interrogated. Still, they provide stories about their lives and the meanings they attach to them, and from there, a researcher can translate the communication to subjects' intent and meaning (Gilbert, 2008). For instance, asking people with chronic diseases about certain aspects of their health differs from allowing them to share their stories. The latter provides wholesome and expressive information that is useful for analysis.

Discourse Analysis Overview

Discourse analysis is often contrasted with content analysis due to its similarities to social scientists. It refers to the analysis of a text within a particular context. Discourse analysis may focus on a topic and evaluate how the same is expressed in various languages and contexts, for example, financial freedom. This analytical method identifies the ideas present in the world and their origin (Hardy, Harley & Phillips, 2004). Compared to content analysis, discourse analysis explains the impossibility of gaining the full meaning of a text without studying its context (Hardy, Harley & Phillips, 2004). Through this method, the interaction of ideas, a discourse, create greater meaning and better ideas, making studying individual ideas easier (Hardy, Harley & Phillips, 2004).

Thematic Analysis Overview

In thematic analysis, a researcher identifies texts and studies the themes arising within them and their frequency. It is the most fundamental but essential analysis method when interacting with research and literary work. For instance, to properly understand the message communicated by a writer, their intent should be studied, drawing up major themes that come up and the number of times they’ve been identified in a text (Braun & Clarke, 2006). It is mostly used unaware when researchers have read about it and are applying it in their qualitative work. It benefits the researchers since it is not thematically restricted compared to other analytical methods such as grounded theory (Braun & Clarke, 2006). A researcher can, therefore, broadly study and draw up the themes of a text, using words and explanations to support them. Decisions on the themes used in a text are made considering an entire dataset instead of one aspect of the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

Grounded Analysis Overview

The grounded analysis stems from an analysis of qualitative data where a researcher bases their theories and arguments on a set of data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). For instance, a company may study the reasons a department is underperforming in sales and profits by interviewing departmental employees to draw conclusions. These conclusions and suggestions are relevant to the particular department since the data is from the departmental employees, and suggestions should increase sales and profits. Additionally, the data collected in grounded analysis can be used to study the relationships between two aspects of the data and result in valuable conclusions and additions. Therefore, the grounded analysis's purpose is to construct theories, meaning that data is only as useful as the theories and recommendations made from it (Chun Tie et al., 2019).

Why is thematic analysis my 1^st chosen method to analyze my qualitative data?

Using thematic analysis allows the researcher to study data, develop a code for major themes, and then identify these themes appearing in a text or interviewing respondents. For my research proposal, it will be essential to analyze the entire data to observe patterns that may arise from the response I will receive. These patterns will provide a basis for the code I will use to analyze the data. Using the thematic analysis approach allows me to reduce the rigidity since there are few rules within which I can identify and classify the themes I identify. Since responses to current educational guidelines for the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) workforce may be biased and may vary from one's opinion to another, I can choose the prevalence of the concerns raised, which are guided by healthcare guidelines on the best methods to prepare healthcare teams responding to emergencies.

Alternative analysis method; Inductive content analysis

The inductive content analysis method will allow me to study the patterns arising in the responses I receive to create a theory behind these major patterns. If the themes identified in my major qualitative analysis method are too broad, don't make sense, or have similar characteristics, a more rigorous method, inductive content analysis, will be more beneficial. The method will allow me to identify major themes and patterns, keep breaking down the data, remove the unnecessary themes and patterns, and collapse many categories into few but relevant categories (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). Through this, a more conclusive theory and more valuable additions to the preparation of emergency teams can be developed.

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research In Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

Chun Tie, Y., Birks, M., & Francis, K. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. SAGE open medicine, 7, 2050312118822927. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2050312118822927.

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal Of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.

Gilbert, G. (2008). Researching Social Life (3rd ed.). Sage.

Hardy, C., Harley, B., & Phillips, N. (2004). Discourse Analysis and Content Analysis: Two Solitudes?. Qualitative Methods. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.998649.