As I mentioned before I find Coding and data analysis one of the most exciting parts of the research process. Writing up my findings is a totally different story!
As I mentioned, I was already familiar with NVivo and have access to it for my work (not that we have ever used it, but I guess that's why grant money is great!) Like so many packages there is such a plethora of tools available I've just begun to scratch the surface. I'm looking forward to experimenting with the image coding as it will relate directly to my methodology and I'm also curious if I can link images to transcription codes since the idea of linking has stuck with me. I think the matrix function in combination with classifications might prove useful in this regard - but again I'll have to experiment further. (Maybe for my article/skill builder?)
This week's readings and class have forced me to think more critically about my use of NVivo as my CAQDAS package of choice. In reality the decision was made for me and I wonder if left to my own devices would I have chosen a different package? Does NVivo truly fit my purpose or have I made my purpose fit NVivo? Working in a case study format with a predefined theoretical framework does, in a sense, lend itself to the a priori set up of NVivo - that and the fact the I've traditionally done the first round of data analysis manually to identify any additional themes which might become child nodes to my predetermined parent nodes. Also, for my dissertation I will conduct a series of four case studies so I can see the matrix function as a valuable tool. But I'm interested to see what Atlas.ti and MaxQda have to offer.
You are asking such good questions related to the relationship between the CAQDAS package and your analytic approach. I think one thing to keep in mind is that there has been a long standing suggestion that we begin thinking about coding away from software and then move to software. This is something I've been thinking about of late. I would love to hear your thoughts on this? I see the value in both approaches, but wonder...
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think you are right to assume that your methodology aligns well with what NVivo affords you. I'm really interested in reading (maybe!!) your skill build around matrix coding. There is a vignette around this in the Sage book that Dr. Lochmiller wrote. Check it out!
Thank you for the advice and resources. I'll be sure to look at them as I start drafting up my final projects!
ReplyDeleteAs for thinking about coding away from the software - it just feels natural. It's quite possibly just the way I was taught, I don't think I would feel comfortable coding without some plan of attack, it wouldn't feel structured enough and I think this idea of structure is what draws me to coding. When I code I'm organizing the data, making sense of what I've gathered and trying to develop some structure for what might seem like disconnected ideas.