The Qualitative Data Analysis Methods

There are many different types of Qualitative Data Analyses, all of

which serve different purposes and have unique strengths and
weaknesses. So, how do you choose the right one? Well, selecting the
right analysis largely depends on your research question. For example:
 Are you wanting to evaluate the use of words, the intention
of the storyteller, the structure of a narrative, or propaganda?
Are you trying to better understand a unique experience,
or understand more about the influence of a given culture on its
members?

In each of these cases, different types of QDA would be

suitable. Here, we will look at five of the most popular methodological
analyses employed in QDA, and explain where they may prove most
valuable. What are the 5 qualitative analysis methods, you ask?
The most common qualitative data analysis methods are:

1. Qualitative content analysis

2. Narrative analysis
3. Discourse analysis
4. Grounded theory (GT)
5. Interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA)

QDA Method #1: Qualitative Content Analysis

Content analysis is possibly the most common and

straightforward type of QDA. It is used to evaluate patterns within
the content (words, phrases or images) or sources of communication,
such as from photographs in newspapers through to political speeches.
 You could, for instance, identify the frequency with which an idea
is shared or spoken about (like the number of times a Kardashian is
mentioned on Twitter…). Or you could be identifying patterns of deeper
underlying interpretations (for instance, by identifying phrases or
words in tourist pamphlets which highlight India as an ancient
country).

Because content analysis can be used in such a wide variety of

ways, it is important to go into the analysis with a specific question.
Large amounts of texts (transcribed or original) are re-grouped into
codes, summarised into categories and themes, and possibly even
tabulated. Because of this, content analysis is one of the more
quantitativ-ey and deductive of these QDAs, looking a little more like
frequencies (numbers) of things than other analyses.

Content analysis is dynamic and widely useful, but it’s not without
its drawback. It is very time consuming (requiring lots of reading
and re-reading of the texts). Additionally, it has been accused of losing
important nuances in communication, for instance, if focusing on
words and phrases as the source of codes.

QDA Method #2: Narrative Analysis

Narrative Analysis is all about listening to people telling

stories and digging into what that means. The assumption here is that
stories form a functional purpose. They fundamentally help us make
sense of the world. Therefore, by analysing stories and the ways in
which they are told, we are unpacking the ways in which people (the
storytellers) deal with, cope with and make sense of reality.

You can use narrative analysis to explore whether HOW

something is being said is important. For instance, it may reveal
something about the story-teller (e.g. a prisoner trying to justify their
crime), or if is influential in their success (e.g. through the ways
entrepreneurs talk about the struggles in their careers) or ability to cope
with a situation (e.g. cancer patients telling stories of hope).

However, the Narrative Approach too has its

weaknesses. Sample sizes are usually very small due to the time-
consuming process of capturing narratives. Because of the small sample
size, as well as the multitude of social and lifestyle factors which can
influence a subject, the narrative approach can be quite difficult to
reproduce in subsequent research. This means that it is difficult to test
the findings of some of this research.

QDA Method #3: Discourse Analysis

Discourse means written or spoken language or debate. So,
discourse analysis is about analysing language in its social
context. In other words, analysing language (for example, a
conversation, speech, etc.) within the culture and society it takes place.
For instance, you could evaluate how a janitor might speak to a CEO, or
how politicians speak about terrorism.

To truly understand these conversations or speeches, the culture

and history of those involved in the communication is important. For
example, a janitor might speak more casually with a CEO in a company
which emphasises equality among workers. Similarly, a politician might
speak more about terrorism if there is a recent terrorist incident in the
country.

So, as you can see, using discourse analysis, you can identify how
culture, history or power imbalance (to name a few) has an effect on the
way concepts are spoken about. Because there are many potential social
influences in how we speak to each other, the potential scope for
investigation using Narrative Analysis is vast. For the same reason, it is
very important to have a very specific question in mind when
analysing the data and looking for patterns and themes.
QDA Method #4: Grounded theory (GT)

Grounded Theory is the methodology where the intention is

explicitly to create theory using data, through a series of “tests” and
“revisions.” For example, trying to figure out what factors might
influence students to read a blog post on QDAs…

In Grounded Theory, you will start with a general

overarching question, or sometimes merely a broad interest in a
given population (e.g. graduate students). You will begin to analyse a
single case or small sample (e.g. five graduate students in a department
at a university), presumably representative of the population (graduate
students) as a whole.

After extensive evaluation or examination, a general

hypothesis or pattern could emerge (e.g. graduate students are
more likely to read this kind of blog post if they are just starting out, or
have changed disciplines). Then you will look for another subject or
small sample (e.g. five more graduate students in a different
department), and see whether this pattern or this hypothesis still holds.
If not, you will look towards commonalities, adapting the hypothesis
accordingly. As this process continues, the theory develops.

Some have also argued that there is a tricky circularity to

Grounded Theory. For it to work, in principle, you should know as
little as possible around the research question and population, so
that you reduce bias in interpretation. However, in many
circumstances, it is also thought to be unwise to approach a
research question without knowledge around the current
literature. In other words, it’s a bit of a “chicken or the egg” situation.
Regardless, grounded theory remains a popular (and powerful) option.
QDA Method #5:
Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)
IPA is designed to understand the experiences of a
subject (for example, a person) in relation to a major life event,
experience or situation (which we refer to as a phenomenon – hence the
“P” in IPA). These phenomena may range from those that are common
(such as motherhood, or the results of a car crash) to those which are
rare (for instance, a subject’s experience in a refugee camp).

IPA is subject-centred (focused on the experiencer), often only

having a very small sample size. This means that, while researchers
often do use coding systems like those common in QDA, it is important
not to lose the depth of experience or meaning within the analysis.

While it is important for researchers to reflect on their

subjective biases in all research, in this analysis it is critical. An
example might be a researcher who was a victim of crime himself (when
his hat was stolen) could insert his own feelings of frustration and anger
into the way he interprets the experience of someone who was
kidnapped. So, one has to be very self-aware when undertaking IPA.

No single QDA method is perfect

The value of QDAs lies in their potential to generate rich

understanding about people, in a way that quantitative analysis
could never achieve – so they’re powerful tools in your research arsenal.
That said, as we’ve seen, no analysis is perfect. If only one methodology
is employed, some (if not, most) of this richness could be lost. Some
research bypasses this problem by using two or more of these
methodologies (a technique known as triangulation), but this is, of
course, quite time-consuming.

These approaches might all use similar coding and theme-

generating techniques, but the intent and approach of each differ
meaningfully. Therefore, coming into your research with a clear
intention or question is very important when you’re thinking about
which qualitative data analysis method to adopt.

Let’s recap on QDA methods…

In this post, we looked at the five most popular qualitative data
analysis methods, namely:

1. Qualitative content analysis

2. Narrative analysis
3. Discourse analysis
4. Grounded theory
5. Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)

These are certainly not the only approaches to Qualitative Data

Analysis but hopefully, at this point, you have a better understanding of
the variety of ways in which you can approach your qualitative data.