This was incredibly helpful! Definitely going to come back here every time I take on new research projects. Sidebar: seeing that UCT emblem was equally triggering and made this presentation so much more relatable (lol). Great work!
I enjoy your humor and realism! I am currently completing my Ph.D. Dissertation and, by far, I have found your video segments on ITA understandable! I shared your like with my classmates.
I am so glad you found it helpful! And thank you so much for sharing. You have no idea how great it feels to hear the tutorials are making some sort of difference 🥰
Hi Dr. J, You are just amazing. So glad contents like yours are available on RUclips. One question: we are conducting a research, we want to analyze the policies of a government (formed by different parties at different times) for the last 4 decades in order to understand voters' voting behaviour in regard to policies. In that scenario, can we adopt a strategy like archival research and case study?
Hi - Yes you can. But, you need to have one main approach and use elements of other approaches to help you triangulate the data. Triangulate just means using multiple sources to validate and strengthen your findings.
Hi! Thank you so much for watching the tutorial. I hope you derived insights from it. I wasn’t sure what precisely you are looking for, so I’m referencing two sources: 1. *This is an article explaining thematic analysis* Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 2. *This is a thesis that uses thematic analysis.* I’m linking a thesis as this will go into a lot more detail than an article and you can see step by step how the thematic analysis was done. Fredericks, J. (2020). Towards an understanding of the boundaries and characteristics of a Digital Business Strategy. Hope this satisfies your need.
Hi! Can we get an example of how were you able to present the results after coding and defining themes? Should it be done in a 1st, 2nd or third POV? Thank you so much.
Hi Dr.J. Great video for TA. I was a bit confused about the inductive, deductive, and both in-/de- theme extraction. Thank you so much for your help and explanation. I was wondering if you will have a further video for the three approaches to TA. Thanks a lot!
Hi Charlene - Thank you for watching the tutorial! What exactly is confusing you re the theme extraction? Perhaps I can assist you in the commentary section as opposed to you waiting for future tutorials.
@@drjthesising1017 Hi dear Dr.J, thanks for your response. I am much clearer now after watching the video. Thanks again. While I have other questions here. We may use a combined approach of TA in a thesis, right? For instance, a combination of reliability TA and reflexive TA, or a combination of reflexive TA and codebook TA. Then the questions are: a. how we call it, still an inductive way? b. do we also follow the same six-phase of TA in the combined approaches of TA, please? (I thought the six-phase may be only suitable for the reflexive TA approach). c. how do we realize the reliability when using different approaches of TA please, inter-coder reliability, intra-coder reliability, or other ways? Looking forward to your tutorials. Nice day!
@@charlenelin2562 Hello!! I’m glad that the tutorial cleared a few things up for you. As for the rest of your questions, herewith is some guidance. Since I don’t know what your study is about, quite a bit of this is just general speak. You would have to evaluate how appropriate they are for your study. 1. *We may use a combined approach of TA in a thesis, right?* Yes, in certain contexts you may use a combination of TA approaches. However, combining them must be done by design and to the benefit of answering the research question(s). Let’s say my study aims to define the characteristics of a fairly new phenomenon. There is quite a bit of literature on the phenomenon already, so I decided to do a deductive study (as in working from existing theory). I could use existing theory to create a codebook to help me identify codes and themes in my data (Codebook TA). However, since this is a fairly *new* phenomenon, I find justification in *FIRST* doing Reflexive TA to see what pops up that may or may not be covered by existing theory. As in I’m first looking for “surprises” in the data. Thereafter, I can do Codebook TA that helps me structure the codes & themes I found during the first round of TA. The Codebook TA can also help me identify codes & themes that I have missed during the first round. That way I get the best of both worlds. Now, the Reliability and Reflexive TA is an unlikely pair. Since Reliability TA requires multiple coders, one would typically decide on the codes beforehand so that it is easy and *consistently* identifiable by these multiple coders. This approach makes Reflexive TA quite difficult. Unless… you are doing an exploratory study or want a diverse perspective on a data set… (There are no absolute answers 😊) 2. *How we call it, still an inductive way?* The nature of an inductive study is that the data itself is dictating patterns. This means, when you are doing the coding you are doing it from a blank sheet. In other words, you don’t have preconceived notions of what codes to look out for. So, if you are going into the process with a defined codebook, it is kind of going against the grain of an inductive study. The nature of the study dictates what coding process you need to use. So, if your study is inductive the most natural fit is Reflexive TA. 3. *Do we also follow the same six-phase of TA in the combined approaches of TA, please?* You can certainly follow the same phases of TA. There will be subtle differences of course. If you are planning on doing Codebook & Reliability TA, you would typically have to develop the codebook before jumping into finding codes. For Reflexive TA, you wouldn’t have to do that. For Reliability TA specifically, you would need to add doing the Cohen’s Kappa test (if it supports the goals of your research) and resolve any issues that the test highlights which you wouldn’t have to do with the other TA approaches. But, the base pretty much stays the same. 4. *How do we realize the reliability when using different approaches of TA please, inter-coder reliability, intra-coder reliability, or other ways* This is a little harder to assist with considering I don’t know the details of your study. As in, are you doing the coding alone, are people assisting you with the coding, is this an exploratory study, is this a descriptive study etc… All these factors play a role… So, I’ll give the high-level overviews here. Intra-coder reliability focus on checking if the same individual who is doing the coding is consistent. Inter-coder reliability is focused on how consistent different individuals are when it comes to coding. My advice is to do only what you must and don’t try to be fancy. If you are doing the coding alone on a data set, you need not worry about these tests. If other people are doing the coding with you then you need to evaluate if you need these tests. Inter-coder reliability (e.g. Cohen’s Kappa) test is valuable if you are many coders and the outcome of your study will benefit from strict and consistent coding practices. Tools such as SPSS can assist with that. Hope this helps!! 🙂
@@drjthesising1017 Hello dear Dr. J. You are really really helpful. Thanks a lot for your valuable time and information. I went back to my research work and did some reading after receiving the detailed explanation from you. May I ask if it is possible for me to contact you via email, please?
@@charlenelin2562 - Hi Charlene. I'm glad you found value in the information provided. You can connect with me here... linkedin.com/in/jeannefredericks if you like. Have a good one!
Great videos. Helped me prep for my final thesis oral exam tomorrow. If it is the Saunders Et al. book you base you information from, which is great, that book was my life safer. You could perhaps do a bit on establishing quality of the research design (e.g. dependability, credibility, transferability and so on.), that has always been a thing I've struggled with. Overall, good job with the videos.
Good luck with your oral exam tomorrow! Yes, for the Research Design series, much of the information was based on Saunders et. al. For the Thematic Analysis series Braun & Clarke was a major inspiration. Thank you so much for watching 😊
@@wajedbasha6984 Hello there! 🥰 Herewith are a few references: I did not know which references you were asking for specifically, so I hope this addresses what you need. *Research Approaches (Inductive, Deductive, Abductive, Retroductive)* AND *Qualitative Research in general* • Dubois, A., & Gadde, L. E. (2002). Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553-560. • Myers, M. D (2013). Qualitative research in business and management. Sage Publications. • Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Essex. Financial Times/Prentice Hall. *Thematic Analysis* • Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Sage Publications. • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa • Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. 2nd Edition, 1 - 158. Creative Commons Attribution. • Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International journal of qualitative methods, 5(1), 80-92. Hope this helps!!
Thank you for this video. I have a question. I have done a literature review for my masters but I do not have any hypothesis but a research question. Later on in the data analysis I will be probably comparing the results to some other studies if the results are similar. Would this be inductive approach? I am looking for new information and patterns Thank you
Hi Thank you for watching this tutorial! What makes a study inductive or deductive (or abductive for that matter) is the approach you take to answer your research question. If you are developing theory from data then you are doing an inductive study. If you are aiming to confirm the existing theory, as in you are expecting to see a certain result, then you are doing a deductive study. In both instances, you would compare results to other studies to show how your work fits into the existing literature. Since I am not familiar with your work I can only provide a generic description.
As always, excellent information and beautifully explained. Thank you for taking the time to create and share these videos ! - Now, is there something you would like to share about online dating experiences? There appears to be a slight sense of Researcher bias creeping in, no judgements, just analysing the data 😂
Hello! I am not sure how fast you're going to see my comment but I am still going to try. 2 Days until the submission deadline of my thesis and I still struggle with the data analysis of a mixed-methods survey. Your video was extremely helpful in clarifying the answers to many questions, besides one. I used a deductive approach for creating the survey, therefore predetermined themes (using Unique Selling Point framework). My question for you is: do these themes apply to one question only? or there is a general theme, while the sub-themes are built upon each question of the survey?
Hello! I’m glad the tutorial answered some of the questions you had! The themes and sub-themes are more general. It would not be a 1:1 relationship with each question in your survey. The connection should rather be to your research question(s). So, you will use thematic analysis to organise the responses in a way that you can tell an evidence-based story. In other words, you will synthesise the organised pieces of data into a story that answers your Research Question(s). For example (Completely made up by the way!) Your questionnaire could have had the following sections: • Target Market • Competitors • Company Products Your themes could be • Customer Engagement o Customer Experience o Customer Expectations • Competitor Analysis • Product Development • Market Segmentation You would then link the themes to your research question that could have been “Towards understanding the impact of Customer Empowerment on Market Share” In summary, the survey is just a method to ensure you collect all the data you need to answer your research question. The analysis is there to ensure that whatever key findings you observe is based on *sound* data points. Hope this helps! Good luck with your submission 🥰
Hi there! For thematic analysis I prefer using NVIVO. However, Atlas TI is also good. Your affiliated institution (university, college, etc.) would also have done their due diligence on what tools can assist best, so check out their library of tools that are available. That is how I was introduced to the tools mentioned above ☺
Hi there! There isn’t a hard and fast rule on how to structure a qualitative discussion, therefore I’ll provide you with some loose principles. You can have two sections for your qualitative thesis. 1) Research Analysis and Findings, and 2) Research Discussion. For the *Research Analysis and Findings*: Be clear of the story that you want to tell the reader and logically arrange your findings so that the story is clear and concise. To do this, create a mind map. You usually create one during Thematic Analysis. Each theme, sub-theme and sub-sub theme on the mind map can have a heading. Arrange each theme in a logical order. This way you can “stack” your findings so that it clearly shows the reader how each finding is related to the other. E.g. Chapter 4: Qualitative Research Analysis and Findings 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Data Collection and Analysis Process 4.3 Demographics 4.4 Thematic Analysis 4.5 Data Reliability *4.6 Findings* 4.6.1 Theme 1 4.6.1.1 Sub-theme 4.6.1.1.1 Sub-sub-theme 4.6.1.2 Sub-theme 4.6.2 Theme 2 Etc. For the *Research Discussion* Show the reader that you can synthesise findings into logical conclusions that ANSWER YOUR RESEARCH QUESTION(S). In other words, you use the *many* findings in the previous section to draw a *few* KEY conclusions - ultimately answering the “So What” question. (Check out my tutorials on the golden thread if you are not familiar with the importance of the “So What?” question. ruclips.net/p/PLNchHgJoSHkFqUVvpYLz3DkS8sZXJwYuJ) E.g. Let’s say your research questions were: a) What are the boundaries and characteristics of a DBS? b) What is the definition of a DBS? So, your discussion may look something like the following: Chapter 5: Research Discussion 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Data Discussion - answering the research questions 5.2.1 First key finding: boundaries of a DBS 5.2.2 Second key finding: characteristics of a DBS 5.2.3 Third key finding: definition of a DBS Hope this is helpful!
Hello!! I don't have any material on LinkedIn on thematic analysis. But, I'm happy to connect on that platform, if you like. Let me know your LinkedIn handle and I'll send you an invitation.
Hello Dr. J. I was wondering if I could meet with you via Zoom for some coaching? My final defense is next week and I really enjoyed your presentation on RUclips and thought I would reach out to you. I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks
@@drjthesising1017 Thank you for the quick response. I am currently struggling to write my discussion for my dissertation... I have my themes and key quotes and understand the A+B=C framework you have set out. I just wondered if you had any examples of dissertation discussions that follow an inductive analysis approach? So I can see the style in an academic context. Thanks again.
@@jadelouise4404 Hi Jade The research approach (inductive, deductive, abductive and retroductive) only indicates the process you follow to go from data collection to eventually deriving insights. Since you already have your insights you now have to switch to storytelling. As in, synthesising the outcomes of your analysis into a story so that the reader can see: • What the insights are (themes), • Why they should believe your insights (key quotes), • And how it relates to existing literature (in-text referencing to other authors who either support your insights or where you contradict what they say). The write-up of your discussion would be the same irrespective of the approach you have taken. My advice is to: • Create a mind-map with your themes, sub-themes and sub-sub themes. Herewith is a link to my video that shows how a mindmap can be done. It is linked to the literature review but it should still work ruclips.net/video/wEaFpxCTDIo/видео.html • Then use each of those themes, sub-themes and sub-sub themes in the mind map as headings. Ensure they are in the right order so that it tells a coherent story. E.g. o 4.6.1 DBS Development (Theme) 4.6.1.1 DBS as a strategic plan (Sub-theme) • 4.6.1.1.1 Customer needs and expectations (Sub-sub-theme) 4.6.1.2 Differential factors of a DBS Etc… o 4.6.2 xxx (Theme) 4.6.2.1 (Sub-theme) 4.6.2.2 (Sub-theme) • 4.6.2.2.1 (Sub-sub theme) o Etc… • Check out my series on academic writing on how to: o Create introductions and meaningful conclusion o Develop arguments in an academic setting o Link words, sentences and paragraphs together to create a coherent story ruclips.net/p/PLNchHgJoSHkE6DvsMHn9HwkO0dYK2NTIV • Check out my series on the golden thread so that whatever you are writing in your discussion is spoken about throughout your dissertation. That way you won’t have any gaps. o ruclips.net/p/PLNchHgJoSHkFqUVvpYLz3DkS8sZXJwYuJ
Dear Dr.J, great video. I have a query regarding my qualitative work. I am exploring barriers to sustainability in the logistics industry. I have collected data through interviews (semi-structured). I already have some set of barriers from the existing literature such as lack of awareness, lack of money, etc. I have tried to map my data to the existing categories of barriers. However, I have found some new categories, which do not exist in the literature. So, could you please help me in identifying this approach: whether my approach is a combination of deductive+inductive or abductive? Also, if you can guide me to represent the coding process to identify the themes in both the deductive+inductive and abductive approaches, it will be a great help. Thank you in advance.
Hello there… Well done on getting this far into the research process! When you tried to map the themes you found in your interviews against the set of barriers you have discovered in literature such as “_lack of awareness, lack of money, etc._” you were doing coding *deductively*. As in, you had a theory and your data confirmed that theory. When you found new categories, which were not part of the literature, you were doing *inductive* coding. It sounds like your study in itself is *deductive*, therefore your thematic analysis was following a deductive approach. In summary, when doing deductive thematic analysis you typically start with inductive coding (letting the data speak) thereafter you apply deductive coding by matching what you discovered during the inductive coding to the literature. If you haven’t done so already, please check out my tutorial on coding that explains the process you intuitively followed. ruclips.net/video/kb8k29qSZCA/видео.html As for guiding you on how to represent the coding… My suggestion is to develop a mind map. It doesn’t matter if you have done the coding inductively or deductively. The outcome would be represented the same. You will have the main theme, sub-themes, sub-sub themes, etc. A mind map can help you illustrate how the different themes fit together. One thing I also do is colour the themes differently. New codes/themes would be e.g. pink. And codes that are already in literature could be e.g. green. This will just help you later with highlighting the new things you discovered and that usually makes for a good base in your contribution to knowledge.
@@drjthesising1017 Thank you for such a nice explanation. It is really helpful for my work. I will reach out to you again in case, some information/advice will be needed regarding my work.
Dear Dr.J, could you please also tell me about coding types? I have seen research papers in which authors have written about open coding/in vivo coding for first-order and axial coding for second-order codes. Can we employ these coding types in thematic analysis too?
Hi there When a researcher explicitly states the process of coding where they use the terms open coding , axial coding, and selective coding, they are typically doing grounded theory research. I suggest you don’t even worry about that. Keep your research simple. Highlight your codes, group them into categories, extract your themes, create a mind map to help you with understanding how they fit together, and synthesise that data into meaningful information.
Hi there! Thank you for your enquiry. I do not generally provide private coaching services. But, I do from time to time meet up with researchers to provide ad hoc advice. What is it that you require assistance with?
@@drjthesising1017I do my master's dissertation online from a distance country and I always feel lonely as I dont have someone even to talk to about my research progress. The support I get from my supervisor is only 5 hours of the whole project including reading time and marking. My deadline is soon 21st January while I am still analysing data, however I am proud of working hard and doing my work myself. I rarely find honest, giving, inspiring experts who are happy to advise.
@@bartooma - This journey can be quite lonely. If you provide me with your e-mail address, via this form (forms.gle/MrWm8hhPMkadx5UHA), I will gladly get in touch and we can have a 30 min Zoom meeting for any advice you would like. Note: For security purposes I don't like us sharing e-mails in the commentary section of such a public forum.
Hello Dr.J! Thank you so much for clearing so many doubts that were bothering me! For my thesis I am using a combination of both inductive and deductive thematic analysis. I have prepared an interview guide but need a qualitative expert's to review it. I seem to be in a fix without proper guidance. Can you please help me with it? Could you please share your mail ID so that I can share with you the guide I created?
Helloooooo! 😄 I am so glad I could clear up a few things for you. Regarding your interview guide, could you kindly provide your email address via this form? forms.gle/ZHxPhjtQQp3d3vqq8 Since this is a public forum I prefer not to share personal information in the comment section. I would not want you to do share yours either. Let's see how we can get you moving on this journey!😊
uploaded on my birthday! it must be a good sign! Thank you for sharing your content!
Happy belated birthday!🥰 I hope you were spoiled rotten!
This was incredibly helpful! Definitely going to come back here every time I take on new research projects. Sidebar: seeing that UCT emblem was equally triggering and made this presentation so much more relatable (lol). Great work!
I am so glad you found it useful! 🥰
Hehehe, UCT buddies... Love it!
I enjoy your humor and realism! I am currently completing my Ph.D. Dissertation and, by far, I have found your video segments on ITA understandable! I shared your like with my classmates.
I am so glad you found it helpful! And thank you so much for sharing. You have no idea how great it feels to hear the tutorials are making some sort of difference 🥰
Thank you so much for creating this video which neatly limns how to do thematic analysis.
I am so glad you found the tutorial useful! 🥰
Fantastic Video. Really enjoyed this. I am happy to have stumbled on this video
I am happy that you stumbled on this video too 🥰!
Hi Dr. J,
You are just amazing. So glad contents like yours are available on RUclips.
One question: we are conducting a research, we want to analyze the policies of a government (formed by different parties at different times) for the last 4 decades in order to understand voters' voting behaviour in regard to policies. In that scenario, can we adopt a strategy like archival research and case study?
Hi - Yes you can. But, you need to have one main approach and use elements of other approaches to help you triangulate the data. Triangulate just means using multiple sources to validate and strengthen your findings.
thank you Dr. appreciate your sharing alot. really help me in progressing my thesis at this current moment
Hello!!
I am so glad I am being of some assistance. And well done on making progress! Don't forget to celebrate along the way 🙂
loved this description
I am glad you loved it!!🥰
Amazingly well described. I do hope you are teaching qualitative methods somewhere. :0)
Thank you very much Rebecca! 🙂. The methods are definitely still coming...
LinkedIn brought me here.. Love the niche Dr. Very informative indeed.. New Subbie here definitely here to stay ..
I'm so glad you found it informative!! And thank you very much for subscribing 😊
this is really good. thank you
I am so glad you found this useful 🥰
This was super helpful, thank you!
I am so glad you found it helpful!! 🙂
Very thorough 👍🏼 thank you 🍰
You are most welcome!!😊
It is so great!!!!! Love you❤❤❤❤
I am so glad you found it of value!! Love you too🥰
Do you have a link of some article using thematic analysis.
Hi!
Thank you so much for watching the tutorial. I hope you derived insights from it. I wasn’t sure what precisely you are looking for, so I’m referencing two sources:
1. *This is an article explaining thematic analysis*
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
2. *This is a thesis that uses thematic analysis.* I’m linking a thesis as this will go into a lot more detail than an article and you can see step by step how the thematic analysis was done.
Fredericks, J. (2020). Towards an understanding of the boundaries and characteristics of a Digital Business Strategy.
Hope this satisfies your need.
Thank you for sharing
You are most welcome!!🥰
Love the new cover 😁
Thank you!! It was time for a change :-)
Hi! Can we get an example of how were you able to present the results after coding and defining themes? Should it be done in a 1st, 2nd or third POV? Thank you so much.
Hi Dr.J. Great video for TA. I was a bit confused about the inductive, deductive, and both in-/de- theme extraction. Thank you so much for your help and explanation. I was wondering if you will have a further video for the three approaches to TA. Thanks a lot!
Hi Charlene - Thank you for watching the tutorial!
What exactly is confusing you re the theme extraction? Perhaps I can assist you in the commentary section as opposed to you waiting for future tutorials.
@@drjthesising1017 Hi dear Dr.J, thanks for your response. I am much clearer now after watching the video. Thanks again.
While I have other questions here. We may use a combined approach of TA in a thesis, right? For instance, a combination of reliability TA and reflexive TA, or a combination of reflexive TA and codebook TA. Then the questions are: a. how we call it, still an inductive way? b. do we also follow the same six-phase of TA in the combined approaches of TA, please? (I thought the six-phase may be only suitable for the reflexive TA approach). c. how do we realize the reliability when using different approaches of TA please, inter-coder reliability, intra-coder reliability, or other ways?
Looking forward to your tutorials. Nice day!
@@charlenelin2562 Hello!! I’m glad that the tutorial cleared a few things up for you. As for the rest of your questions, herewith is some guidance. Since I don’t know what your study is about, quite a bit of this is just general speak. You would have to evaluate how appropriate they are for your study.
1. *We may use a combined approach of TA in a thesis, right?*
Yes, in certain contexts you may use a combination of TA approaches. However, combining them must be done by design and to the benefit of answering the research question(s). Let’s say my study aims to define the characteristics of a fairly new phenomenon. There is quite a bit of literature on the phenomenon already, so I decided to do a deductive study (as in working from existing theory). I could use existing theory to create a codebook to help me identify codes and themes in my data (Codebook TA). However, since this is a fairly *new* phenomenon, I find justification in *FIRST* doing Reflexive TA to see what pops up that may or may not be covered by existing theory. As in I’m first looking for “surprises” in the data. Thereafter, I can do Codebook TA that helps me structure the codes & themes I found during the first round of TA. The Codebook TA can also help me identify codes & themes that I have missed during the first round. That way I get the best of both worlds.
Now, the Reliability and Reflexive TA is an unlikely pair. Since Reliability TA requires multiple coders, one would typically decide on the codes beforehand so that it is easy and *consistently* identifiable by these multiple coders. This approach makes Reflexive TA quite difficult. Unless… you are doing an exploratory study or want a diverse perspective on a data set… (There are no absolute answers 😊)
2. *How we call it, still an inductive way?*
The nature of an inductive study is that the data itself is dictating patterns. This means, when you are doing the coding you are doing it from a blank sheet. In other words, you don’t have preconceived notions of what codes to look out for. So, if you are going into the process with a defined codebook, it is kind of going against the grain of an inductive study. The nature of the study dictates what coding process you need to use. So, if your study is inductive the most natural fit is Reflexive TA.
3. *Do we also follow the same six-phase of TA in the combined approaches of TA, please?*
You can certainly follow the same phases of TA. There will be subtle differences of course. If you are planning on doing Codebook & Reliability TA, you would typically have to develop the codebook before jumping into finding codes. For Reflexive TA, you wouldn’t have to do that. For Reliability TA specifically, you would need to add doing the Cohen’s Kappa test (if it supports the goals of your research) and resolve any issues that the test highlights which you wouldn’t have to do with the other TA approaches. But, the base pretty much stays the same.
4. *How do we realize the reliability when using different approaches of TA please, inter-coder reliability, intra-coder reliability, or other ways*
This is a little harder to assist with considering I don’t know the details of your study. As in, are you doing the coding alone, are people assisting you with the coding, is this an exploratory study, is this a descriptive study etc… All these factors play a role… So, I’ll give the high-level overviews here. Intra-coder reliability focus on checking if the same individual who is doing the coding is consistent. Inter-coder reliability is focused on how consistent different individuals are when it comes to coding. My advice is to do only what you must and don’t try to be fancy. If you are doing the coding alone on a data set, you need not worry about these tests. If other people are doing the coding with you then you need to evaluate if you need these tests. Inter-coder reliability (e.g. Cohen’s Kappa) test is valuable if you are many coders and the outcome of your study will benefit from strict and consistent coding practices. Tools such as SPSS can assist with that.
Hope this helps!! 🙂
@@drjthesising1017 Hello dear Dr. J. You are really really helpful. Thanks a lot for your valuable time and information. I went back to my research work and did some reading after receiving the detailed explanation from you. May I ask if it is possible for me to contact you via email, please?
@@charlenelin2562 - Hi Charlene. I'm glad you found value in the information provided.
You can connect with me here... linkedin.com/in/jeannefredericks if you like.
Have a good one!
Good video, I have a question, how I can contact you?
Great videos. Helped me prep for my final thesis oral exam tomorrow. If it is the Saunders Et al. book you base you information from, which is great, that book was my life safer. You could perhaps do a bit on establishing quality of the research design (e.g. dependability, credibility, transferability and so on.), that has always been a thing I've struggled with. Overall, good job with the videos.
Good luck with your oral exam tomorrow!
Yes, for the Research Design series, much of the information was based on Saunders et. al. For the Thematic Analysis series Braun & Clarke was a major inspiration. Thank you so much for watching 😊
@@drjthesising1017Thanks so much can you please put the references for me?
@@wajedbasha6984 Hello there! 🥰
Herewith are a few references:
I did not know which references you were asking for specifically, so I hope this addresses what you need.
*Research Approaches (Inductive, Deductive, Abductive, Retroductive)* AND *Qualitative Research in general*
• Dubois, A., & Gadde, L. E. (2002). Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553-560.
• Myers, M. D (2013). Qualitative research in business and management. Sage Publications.
• Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Essex. Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
*Thematic Analysis*
• Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development. Sage Publications.
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
• Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. 2nd Edition, 1 - 158. Creative Commons Attribution.
• Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International journal of qualitative methods, 5(1), 80-92.
Hope this helps!!
Hello, how to do a study based on a traditional literature review drawing on systematic review methods by using thematic analysis
Great job!! Very insightful and easy to follow.
Thank you very much!! I'm glad you found it helpful 🥰
Thank you for this video. I have a question. I have done a literature review for my masters but I do not have any hypothesis but a research question. Later on in the data analysis I will be probably comparing the results to some other studies if the results are similar. Would this be inductive approach? I am looking for new information and patterns
Thank you
Hi
Thank you for watching this tutorial!
What makes a study inductive or deductive (or abductive for that matter) is the approach you take to answer your research question. If you are developing theory from data then you are doing an inductive study. If you are aiming to confirm the existing theory, as in you are expecting to see a certain result, then you are doing a deductive study. In both instances, you would compare results to other studies to show how your work fits into the existing literature.
Since I am not familiar with your work I can only provide a generic description.
As always, excellent information and beautifully explained. Thank you for taking the time to create and share these videos
! - Now, is there something you would like to share about online dating experiences? There appears to be a slight sense of Researcher bias creeping in, no judgements, just analysing the data 😂
Hehehehe, "Researcher Bias" 😂 ... Let's just say my hypothesis was supported...
@@drjthesising1017 Supported evidence is always the best kind :)
Hello! I am not sure how fast you're going to see my comment but I am still going to try. 2 Days until the submission deadline of my thesis and I still struggle with the data analysis of a mixed-methods survey. Your video was extremely helpful in clarifying the answers to many questions, besides one. I used a deductive approach for creating the survey, therefore predetermined themes (using Unique Selling Point framework). My question for you is: do these themes apply to one question only? or there is a general theme, while the sub-themes are built upon each question of the survey?
Hello! I’m glad the tutorial answered some of the questions you had!
The themes and sub-themes are more general. It would not be a 1:1 relationship with each question in your survey. The connection should rather be to your research question(s). So, you will use thematic analysis to organise the responses in a way that you can tell an evidence-based story. In other words, you will synthesise the organised pieces of data into a story that answers your Research Question(s).
For example (Completely made up by the way!)
Your questionnaire could have had the following sections:
• Target Market
• Competitors
• Company Products
Your themes could be
• Customer Engagement
o Customer Experience
o Customer Expectations
• Competitor Analysis
• Product Development
• Market Segmentation
You would then link the themes to your research question that could have been “Towards understanding the impact of Customer Empowerment on Market Share”
In summary, the survey is just a method to ensure you collect all the data you need to answer your research question. The analysis is there to ensure that whatever key findings you observe is based on *sound* data points.
Hope this helps! Good luck with your submission 🥰
Pleased which software is best use for thematic analysis. Help a newbies.
Thanks
Hi there!
For thematic analysis I prefer using NVIVO. However, Atlas TI is also good.
Your affiliated institution (university, college, etc.) would also have done their due diligence on what tools can assist best, so check out their library of tools that are available. That is how I was introduced to the tools mentioned above ☺
Thank-you for a wonderful video :) Do you have any regarding how to structure a qualitative thesis discussion section?
Hi there!
There isn’t a hard and fast rule on how to structure a qualitative discussion, therefore I’ll provide you with some loose principles.
You can have two sections for your qualitative thesis. 1) Research Analysis and Findings, and 2) Research Discussion.
For the *Research Analysis and Findings*:
Be clear of the story that you want to tell the reader and logically arrange your findings so that the story is clear and concise.
To do this, create a mind map. You usually create one during Thematic Analysis. Each theme, sub-theme and sub-sub theme on the mind map can have a heading. Arrange each theme in a logical order. This way you can “stack” your findings so that it clearly shows the reader how each finding is related to the other. E.g.
Chapter 4: Qualitative Research Analysis and Findings
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Data Collection and Analysis Process
4.3 Demographics
4.4 Thematic Analysis
4.5 Data Reliability
*4.6 Findings*
4.6.1 Theme 1
4.6.1.1 Sub-theme
4.6.1.1.1 Sub-sub-theme
4.6.1.2 Sub-theme
4.6.2 Theme 2
Etc.
For the *Research Discussion*
Show the reader that you can synthesise findings into logical conclusions that ANSWER YOUR RESEARCH QUESTION(S). In other words, you use the *many* findings in the previous section to draw a *few* KEY conclusions - ultimately answering the “So What” question. (Check out my tutorials on the golden thread if you are not familiar with the importance of the “So What?” question. ruclips.net/p/PLNchHgJoSHkFqUVvpYLz3DkS8sZXJwYuJ)
E.g. Let’s say your research questions were:
a) What are the boundaries and characteristics of a DBS?
b) What is the definition of a DBS?
So, your discussion may look something like the following:
Chapter 5: Research Discussion
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Data Discussion - answering the research questions
5.2.1 First key finding: boundaries of a DBS
5.2.2 Second key finding: characteristics of a DBS
5.2.3 Third key finding: definition of a DBS
Hope this is helpful!
Namaste Dr. J! Would be happy if I would read more about thematic analysis via LinkedIn!
Hello!!
I don't have any material on LinkedIn on thematic analysis. But, I'm happy to connect on that platform, if you like.
Let me know your LinkedIn handle and I'll send you an invitation.
@@drjthesising1017your are so kind, and its Sanjaya Kumar Pant there too.
@@NepaliSanskriti - I've sent you a request.
Hello Dr. J.
I was wondering if I could meet with you via Zoom for some coaching? My final defense is next week and I really enjoyed your presentation on RUclips and thought I would reach out to you.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks
Helloooooo!
I'm so glad you enjoyed the tutorials. Please note I have sent you a LinkedIn message with the details re when we can meet 🙂
@@drjthesising1017 Okay great! Thank you.
Hello, super useful video so thank you. Do you have any example texts of inductive writing? Many thanks.
Hi there!!
I am so glad you found it useful🥰!
What do you mean with "Inductive Writing"?
@@drjthesising1017 Thank you for the quick response.
I am currently struggling to write my discussion for my dissertation... I have my themes and key quotes and understand the A+B=C framework you have set out.
I just wondered if you had any examples of dissertation discussions that follow an inductive analysis approach? So I can see the style in an academic context.
Thanks again.
@@jadelouise4404
Hi Jade
The research approach (inductive, deductive, abductive and retroductive) only indicates the process you follow to go from data collection to eventually deriving insights. Since you already have your insights you now have to switch to storytelling. As in, synthesising the outcomes of your analysis into a story so that the reader can see:
• What the insights are (themes),
• Why they should believe your insights (key quotes),
• And how it relates to existing literature (in-text referencing to other authors who either support your insights or where you contradict what they say).
The write-up of your discussion would be the same irrespective of the approach you have taken. My advice is to:
• Create a mind-map with your themes, sub-themes and sub-sub themes. Herewith is a link to my video that shows how a mindmap can be done. It is linked to the literature review but it should still work ruclips.net/video/wEaFpxCTDIo/видео.html
• Then use each of those themes, sub-themes and sub-sub themes in the mind map as headings. Ensure they are in the right order so that it tells a coherent story. E.g.
o 4.6.1 DBS Development (Theme)
4.6.1.1 DBS as a strategic plan (Sub-theme)
• 4.6.1.1.1 Customer needs and expectations (Sub-sub-theme)
4.6.1.2 Differential factors of a DBS
Etc…
o 4.6.2 xxx (Theme)
4.6.2.1 (Sub-theme)
4.6.2.2 (Sub-theme)
• 4.6.2.2.1 (Sub-sub theme)
o Etc…
• Check out my series on academic writing on how to:
o Create introductions and meaningful conclusion
o Develop arguments in an academic setting
o Link words, sentences and paragraphs together to create a coherent story
ruclips.net/p/PLNchHgJoSHkE6DvsMHn9HwkO0dYK2NTIV
• Check out my series on the golden thread so that whatever you are writing in your discussion is spoken about throughout your dissertation. That way you won’t have any gaps.
o ruclips.net/p/PLNchHgJoSHkFqUVvpYLz3DkS8sZXJwYuJ
Dear Dr.J, great video. I have a query regarding my qualitative work. I am exploring barriers to sustainability in the logistics industry. I have collected data through interviews (semi-structured). I already have some set of barriers from the existing literature such as lack of awareness, lack of money, etc. I have tried to map my data to the existing categories of barriers. However, I have found some new categories, which do not exist in the literature. So, could you please help me in identifying this approach: whether my approach is a combination of deductive+inductive or abductive? Also, if you can guide me to represent the coding process to identify the themes in both the deductive+inductive and abductive approaches, it will be a great help. Thank you in advance.
Hello there…
Well done on getting this far into the research process!
When you tried to map the themes you found in your interviews against the set of barriers you have discovered in literature such as “_lack of awareness, lack of money, etc._” you were doing coding *deductively*. As in, you had a theory and your data confirmed that theory.
When you found new categories, which were not part of the literature, you were doing *inductive* coding.
It sounds like your study in itself is *deductive*, therefore your thematic analysis was following a deductive approach. In summary, when doing deductive thematic analysis you typically start with inductive coding (letting the data speak) thereafter you apply deductive coding by matching what you discovered during the inductive coding to the literature. If you haven’t done so already, please check out my tutorial on coding that explains the process you intuitively followed. ruclips.net/video/kb8k29qSZCA/видео.html
As for guiding you on how to represent the coding… My suggestion is to develop a mind map. It doesn’t matter if you have done the coding inductively or deductively. The outcome would be represented the same. You will have the main theme, sub-themes, sub-sub themes, etc. A mind map can help you illustrate how the different themes fit together. One thing I also do is colour the themes differently. New codes/themes would be e.g. pink. And codes that are already in literature could be e.g. green. This will just help you later with highlighting the new things you discovered and that usually makes for a good base in your contribution to knowledge.
@@drjthesising1017 Thank you for such a nice explanation. It is really helpful for my work. I will reach out to you again in case, some information/advice will be needed regarding my work.
Dear Dr.J, could you please also tell me about coding types? I have seen research papers in which authors have written about open coding/in vivo coding for first-order and axial coding for second-order codes. Can we employ these coding types in thematic analysis too?
Hi there
When a researcher explicitly states the process of coding where they use the terms open coding , axial coding, and selective coding, they are typically doing grounded theory research. I suggest you don’t even worry about that.
Keep your research simple. Highlight your codes, group them into categories, extract your themes, create a mind map to help you with understanding how they fit together, and synthesise that data into meaningful information.
@@drjthesising1017 Thank you for clearing my doubts.
@@nehauttam1481 You are most welcome!
What is thematic analysis? Please send me
Hi there - Could you please advise what about thematic analysis is stumping you? In the video an overview of thematic analysis is provided.
Do you give online private coaching services?
Hi there!
Thank you for your enquiry. I do not generally provide private coaching services. But, I do from time to time meet up with researchers to provide ad hoc advice. What is it that you require assistance with?
@@drjthesising1017I do my master's dissertation online from a distance country and I always feel lonely as I dont have someone even to talk to about my research progress. The support I get from my supervisor is only 5 hours of the whole project including reading time and marking. My deadline is soon 21st January while I am still analysing data, however I am proud of working hard and doing my work myself. I rarely find honest, giving, inspiring experts who are happy to advise.
@@bartooma - This journey can be quite lonely. If you provide me with your e-mail address, via this form (forms.gle/MrWm8hhPMkadx5UHA), I will gladly get in touch and we can have a 30 min Zoom meeting for any advice you would like.
Note: For security purposes I don't like us sharing e-mails in the commentary section of such a public forum.
Hello Dr.J! Thank you so much for clearing so many doubts that were bothering me! For my thesis I am using a combination of both inductive and deductive thematic analysis. I have prepared an interview guide but need a qualitative expert's to review it. I seem to be in a fix without proper guidance. Can you please help me with it? Could you please share your mail ID so that I can share with you the guide I created?
Helloooooo! 😄
I am so glad I could clear up a few things for you.
Regarding your interview guide, could you kindly provide your email address via this form?
forms.gle/ZHxPhjtQQp3d3vqq8
Since this is a public forum I prefer not to share personal information in the comment section. I would not want you to do share yours either.
Let's see how we can get you moving on this journey!😊
@@drjthesising1017 Thank you so much! I have submitted the form 😊
@@aishwaryaskumar1055 - There is something waiting for you in your inbox 🥰! Well done on the preparation that went into your interview guide 🙂