Thematic analysis

Thematic analysis is one of the most common forms of analysis within qualitative research.[1][2] It
emphasizes identifying, analysing and interpreting patterns of meaning (or "themes") within qualitative
data.[1] Thematic analysis is often understood as a method or technique in contrast to most other qualitative
analytic approaches - such as grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative analysis and interpretative
phenomenological analysis - which can be described as methodologies or theoretically informed
frameworks for research (they specify guiding theory, appropriate research questions and methods of data
collection, as well as procedures for conducting analysis). Thematic analysis is best thought of as an
umbrella term for a variety of different approaches, rather than a singular method. Different versions of
thematic analysis are underpinned by different philosophical and conceptual assumptions and are divergent
in terms of procedure. Leading thematic analysis proponents, psychologists Virginia Braun and Victoria
Clarke[3] distinguish between three main types of thematic analysis: coding reliability approaches
(examples include the approaches developed by Richard Boyatzis[4] and Greg Guest and colleagues[2]),
code book approaches (these includes approaches like framework analysis,[5] template analysis (https://rese
arch.hud.ac.uk/research-subjects/human-health/template-analysis/)[6] and matrix analysis[7]) and reflexive
approaches.[8][9] They describe their own widely used approach first outlined in 2006 in the journal
Qualitative Research in Psychology (https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uqrp20)[1] as reflexive thematic
analysis.[10] Their 2006 paper has over 90,000 (https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=2zK5essAAAA
J) Google Scholar citations and according to Google Scholar is the most cited academic paper published in
2006. The popularity of this paper exemplifies the growing interest in thematic analysis as a distinct method
(although some have questioned whether it is a distinct method or simply a generic set of analytic
procedures[11]).

Contents
Description
Different approaches to thematic analysis
Theme
Methodological issues
Reflexivity journals
Coding practice
Sample size considerations
Braun and Clarke's six phases of thematic analysis
Phase 1: Becoming familiar with the data
Transcription
Phase 2: Generating codes
Data reduction (Coffey and Atkinson[44])
Data complication (Coffey and Atkinson[44])
Phase 3: Generating initial themes
Phase 4: Reviewing themes
Level 1 (Reviewing the themes against the coded data)
Level 2 (Reviewing the themes against the entire data-set)
 Phase 5: Defining and naming themes
Phase 6: Producing the report
Advantages and disadvantages
Advantages
Disadvantages
Links
See also
References

Description
Thematic analysis is used in qualitative research and focuses on examining themes or patterns of meaning
within data.[12] This method can emphasize both organization and rich description of the data set and
theoretically informed interpretation of meaning.[1] Thematic analysis goes beyond simply counting phrases
or words in a text (as in content analysis) and explores explicit and implicit meanings within the data.[2]
Coding is the primary process for developing themes by identifying items of analytic interest in the data and
tagging these with a coding label.[4] In some thematic analysis approaches coding follows theme
development and is a process of allocating data to pre-identified themes (this approach is common in coding
reliability and code book approaches), in other approaches - notably Braun and Clarke's reflexive approach
- coding precedes theme development and themes are built from codes.[3] One of the hallmarks of thematic
analysis is its flexibility - flexibility with regards to framing theory, research questions and research
design.[1] Thematic analysis can be used to explore questions about participants' lived experiences,
perspectives, behaviour and practices, the factors and social processes that influence and shape particular
phenomena, the explicit and implicit norms and 'rules' governing particular practices, as well as the social
construction of meaning and the representation of social objects in particular texts and contexts.[13]

Thematic analysis can be used to analyse most types of qualitative data including qualitative data collected
from interviews, focus groups, surveys, solicited diaries, visual methods, observation and field research,
action research, memory work, vignettes, story completion (https://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/our
-research/research-groups/story-completion.html) and secondary sources. Data-sets can range from short,
perfunctory response to an open-ended survey question to hundreds of pages of interview transcripts.[14]
Thematic analysis can be used to analyse both small and large data-sets.[1] Thematic analysis is often used
in mixed-method designs - the theoretical flexibility of TA makes it a more straightforward choice than
approaches with specific embedded theoretical assumptions.

Thematic analysis is sometimes claimed to be compatible with phenomenology in that it can focus on
participants' subjective experiences and sense-making;[2] there is a long tradition of using thematic analysis
in phenomenological research.[15] A phenomenological approach emphasizes the participants' perceptions,
feelings and experiences as the paramount object of study. Rooted in humanistic psychology,
phenomenology notes giving voice to the "other" as a key component in qualitative research in general.
This approach allows the respondents to discuss the topic in their own words, free of constraints from
fixed-response questions found in quantitative studies.

Thematic analysis is sometimes erroneously assumed to be only compatible with phenomenology or

experiential approaches to qualitative research. Braun and Clarke argue that their reflexive approach is
equally compatible with social constructionist, poststructuralist and critical approaches to qualitative
research.[16] They emphasise the theoretical flexibility of thematic analysis and its use within realist, critical
realist and relativist ontologies and positivist, contextualist and constructionist epistemologies.
Like most research methods, the process of data analysis can occur in two primary ways—inductively or
deductively.[1] In an inductive approach, the themes identified are strongly linked to the data.[4] This means
that the process of coding occurs without trying to fit the data into a pre-existing theory or framework. It is
important to note however that induction in thematic analysis is not 'pure' induction; it is not possible for the
researchers to free themselves from ontological, epistemological and paradigmatic assumptions - coding
will always reflect the researcher's philosophical standpoint and research values.[1] Deductive approaches,
on the other hand, are theory-driven.[17] This form of analysis tends to be more interpretative because
analysis is shaped and informed by pre-existing theory and concepts. Deductive approaches can involve
seeking to identify themes identified in other research in the data-set or using existing theory as a lens
through which to organise, code and interpret the data. Sometimes deductive approaches are misunderstood
as coding driven by a research question or the data collection questions. A thematic analysis can also
combine inductive and deductive approaches.

Different approaches to thematic analysis

Coding reliability[4][2] approaches have the longest history and are often little different from qualitative
content analysis. As the name suggests they prioritise the measurement of coding reliability through the use
of structured and fixed code books, the use of multiple coders who work independently to apply the code
book to the data, the measurement of inter-rater reliability or inter-coder agreement (typically using Cohen's
Kappa) and the determination of final coding through consensus or agreement between coders. These
approaches are a form of qualitative positivism or small q qualitative research.[18] They combine the use of
qualitative methods with the research values and assumptions of (quantitative) positivism - emphasising the
importance of establishing coding reliability and viewing researcher subjectivity or 'bias' as a potential
threat to coding reliability that must be contained and controlled. Boyatzis[4] presents his approach as one
that can 'bridge the divide' between quantitative (positivist) and qualitative (interpretivist) paradigms. Some
qualitative researchers are critical of the use of structured code books, multiple independent coders and
inter-rater reliability measures. Janice Morse argues that such coding is necessarily coarse and superficial to
facilitate coding agreement.[19] Braun and Clarke (citing Yardley[20]) argue that all coding agreement
demonstrates is that coders have been trained to code in the same way not that coding is 'reliable' or
'accurate'.[13]

Code book approaches like framework analysis,[5] template analysis[6] and matrix analysis[7] centre on the
use of structured code books but - unlike coding reliability approaches - emphasise to a greater or lesser
extent qualitative research values. Both coding reliability and code book approaches typically involve early
theme development - with all or some themes developed prior to coding, often following some data
familiarisation (reading and re-reading data to become intimately familiar with its contents). Once themes
have been developed the code book is created - this might involve some initial analysis of a portion of or all
of the data. The data is then coded. Coding involves allocating data to the pre-determined themes using the
code book as a guide. The code book can also be used to map and display the occurrence of codes and
themes in each data item. Themes are often of the shared topic type discussed by Braun and Clarke.[3]

Reflexive approaches centre organic and flexible coding processes - there is no code book, coding can be
undertaken by one researcher, if multiple researchers are involved in coding this is conceptualised as a
collaborative process rather than one that should lead to consensus. Individual codes are not fixed - they
can evolve throughout the coding process, the boundaries of the code can be redrawn, codes can be split
into two or more codes, collapsed with other codes and even promoted to themes.[13] Reflexive approaches
typically involve later theme development - with themes created from clustering together similar codes.
Themes should capture shared meaning organised around a central concept or idea.[21]
Braun and Clarke and colleagues have been critical of a tendency to overlook the diversity within thematic
analysis and the failure to recognise the differences between the various approaches they have mapped
out.[22] They argue that this failure leads to unthinking 'mash-ups' of their approach with incompatible
techniques and approaches such as code books, consensus coding and measurement of inter-rater reliability.

Theme
There is no one definition or conceptualisation of a theme in thematic analysis.[23] For some thematic
analysis proponents, including Braun and Clarke, themes are conceptualised as patterns of shared meaning
across data items, underpinned or united by a central concept, which are important to the understanding of a
phenomenon and are relevant to the research question.[3] For others (including most coding reliability and
code book proponents), themes are simply summaries of information related to a particular topic or data
domain; there is no requirement for shared meaning organised around a central concept, just a shared
topic.[3] Although these two conceptualisations are associated with particular approaches to thematic
analysis, they are often confused and conflated. What Braun and Clarke call domain summary or topic
summary themes often have one word theme titles (e.g. Gender, Support) or titles like 'Benefits of...',
'Barriers to...' signalling the focus on summarising everything participants said, or the main points raised, in
relation to a particular topic or data domain.[3] Topic summary themes are typically developed prior to data
coding and often reflect data collection questions. Shared meaning themes that are underpinned by a central
concept or idea[21] cannot be developed prior to coding (because they are built from codes), so are the
output of a thorough and systematic coding process. Braun and Clarke have been critical of the confusion
of topic summary themes with their conceptualisation of themes as capturing shared meaning underpinned
by a central concept.[24] Some qualitative researchers have argued that topic summaries represent an under-
developed analysis or analytic foreclosure.[25][26]

There is controversy around the notion that 'themes emerge' from data. Braun and Clarke are critical of this
language because they argue it positions themes as entities that exist fully formed in data - the researcher is
simply a passive witness to the themes 'emerging' from the data.[1] Instead they argue that the researcher
plays an active role in the creation of themes - so themes are constructed, created, generated rather than
simply emerging. Others use the term deliberatively to capture the inductive (emergent) creation of themes.
However, it is not always clear how the term is being used.

Prevalence or recurrence is not necessarily the most important criteria in determining what constitutes a
theme; themes can be considered important if they are highly relevant to the research question and
significant in understanding the phenomena of interest.[1] Theme prevalence does not necessarily mean the
frequency at which a theme occurs (i.e. the number of data items in which it occurs); it can also mean how
much data a theme captures within each data item and across the data-set. Themes are typically evident
across the data set, but a higher frequency does not necessarily mean that the theme is more important to
understanding the data. A researcher's judgement is the key tool in determining which themes are more
crucial.[1]

There are also different levels at which data can be coded and themes can be identified—semantic and
latent.[4][1] A thematic analysis can focus on one of these levels or both. Semantic codes and themes
identify the explicit and surface meanings of the data. The researcher does not look beyond what the
participant said or wrote. Conversely, latent codes or themes capture underlying ideas, patterns, and
assumptions. This requires a more interpretative and conceptual orientation to the data.

For Braun and Clarke, there is a clear (but not absolute) distinction between a theme and a code - a code
captures one (or more) insights about the data and a theme encompasses numerous insights organised
around a central concept or idea. They often use the analogy of a brick and tile house - the code is an
individual brick or tile, and themes are the walls or roof panels, each made up of numerous codes. Other
approaches to thematic analysis don't make such a clear distinction between codes and themes - several
texts recommend that researchers "code for themes".[27] This can be confusing because for Braun and
Clarke, and others, the theme is considered the outcome or result of coding, not that which is coded. In
approaches that make a clear distinction between codes and themes, the code is the label that is given to
particular pieces of the data that contributes to a theme. For example, "SECURITY can be a code, but A
FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY can be a theme."[27]

Methodological issues

Reflexivity journals

Given that qualitative work is inherently interpretive research, the positionings, values, and judgments of
the researchers need to be explicitly acknowledged so they are taken into account in making sense of the
final report and judging its quality.[28] This type of openness and reflection is considered to be positive in
the qualitative community.[29] Researchers shape the work that they do and are the instrument for collecting
and analyzing data. In order to acknowledge the researcher as the tool of analysis, it is useful to create and
maintain a reflexivity journal.[30]

The reflexivity process can be described as the researcher reflecting on and documenting how their values,
positionings, choices and research practices influenced and shaped the study and the final analysis of the
data. Reflexivity journals are somewhat similar to the use of analytic memos or memo writing in grounded
theory, which can be useful for reflecting on the developing analysis and potential patterns, themes and
concepts.[14] Throughout the coding process researchers should have detailed records of the development
of each of their codes and potential themes. In addition, changes made to themes and connections between
themes can be discussed in the final report to assist the reader in understanding decisions that were made
throughout the coding process.[31]

Once data collection is complete and researchers begin the data analysis phases, they should make notes on
their initial impressions of the data. The logging of ideas for future analysis can aid in getting thoughts and
reflections written down and may serve as a reference for potential coding ideas as one progresses from one
phase to the next in the thematic analysis process.[14]

Coding practice

Questions to consider whilst coding may include:[14]

What are people doing? What are they trying to accomplish?

How exactly do they do this? What specific means or strategies are used?
How do people talk about and understand what is going on?
What assumptions are they making?
What do I see going on here? What did I learn from note taking?
Why did I include them?

Such questions are generally asked throughout all cycles of the coding process and the data analysis. A
reflexivity journal is often used to identify potential codes that were not initially pertinent to the study.[14]

Sample size considerations

There is no straightforward answer to questions of sample size in thematic analysis; just as there is no
straightforward answer to sample size in qualitative research more broadly (the classic answer is 'it depends'
- on the scope of the study, the research question and topic, the method or methods of data collection, the
richness of individual data items, the analytic approach[32]). Some coding reliability and code book
proponents provide guidance for determining sample size in advance of data analysis - focusing on the
concept of saturation or information redundancy (no new information, codes or themes are evident in the
data). These attempts to 'operationalise' saturation suggest that code saturation (often defined as identifying
one instances of a code) can be achieved in as few as 12 or even 6 interviews in some circumstances.[33]
Meaning saturation - developing a "richly textured" understanding of issues - is thought to require larger
samples (at least 24 interviews).[34] There are numerous critiques of the concept of data saturation - many
argue it is embedded within a realist conception of fixed meaning and in a qualitative paradigm there is
always potential for new understandings because of the researcher's role in interpreting meaning.[35] Some
quantitative researchers have offered statistical models for determining sample size in advance of data
collection in thematic analysis. For example, Fugard and Potts offered a prospective, quantitative tool to
support thinking on sample size by analogy to quantitative sample size estimation methods.[36] Lowe and
colleagues proposed quantitative, probabilistic measures of degree of saturation that can be calculated from
an initial sample and used to estimate the sample size required to achieve a specified level of saturation.[37]
Their analysis indicates that commonly-used binomial sample size estimation methods may significantly
underestimate the sample size required for saturation. All of these tools have been criticised by qualitative
researchers (including Braun and Clarke[38]) for relying on assumptions about qualitative research, thematic
analysis and themes that are antithetical to approaches that prioritise qualitative research values.[39][40][41]

Braun and Clarke's six phases of thematic analysis

 Phase[1] Process Result Reflexivity Journal Entries[1]
Preliminary List start codes in journal,
Read and re-read data in order to become familiar
"start" codes along with a description of
Phase 1 with what the data entails, paying specific
and detailed what each code means and
attention to patterns that occur.
notes. the source of the code.
Generate the initial codes by documenting where
Provide detailed information
and how patterns occur. This happens through Comprehensive
as to how and why codes
data reduction where the researcher collapses codes of how
were combined, what
Phase 2 data into labels in order to create categories for data answers
questions the researcher is
more efficient analysis. Data complication is also research
asking of the data, and how
completed here. This involves the researcher question.
codes are related.
making inferences about what the codes mean.
Combine codes into overarching themes that
List of
accurately depict the data. It is important in Reflexivity journals need to
candidate
developing themes that the researcher describes note how the codes were
Phase 3 themes for
exactly what the themes mean, even if the theme interpreted and combined to
further
does not seem to "fit". The researcher should also form themes.
analysis.
describe what is missing from the analysis.
Notes need to include the
Coherent process of understanding
In this stage, the researcher looks at how the recognition of themes and how they fit
themes support the data and the overarching how themes together with the given codes.
Phase 4 theoretical perspective. If the analysis seems are patterned Answers to the research
incomplete, the researcher needs to go back and to tell an questions and data-driven
find what is missing. accurate story questions need to be
about the data. abundantly complex and well-
supported by the data.
A
comprehensive
analysis of
The researcher needs to define what each theme The researcher should
what the
Phase 5 is, which aspects of data are being captured, and describe each theme within a
themes
what is interesting about the themes. few sentences.
contribute to
understanding
the data.
Note why particular themes
When the researchers write the report, they must
are more useful at making
decide which themes make meaningful
contributions and
contributions to understanding what is going on A thick
understanding what is going
Phase 6 within the data. Researchers should also conduct description of
on within the data set.
"member checking". This is where the the results.
Describe the process of
researchers go back to the sample at hand to see
choosing the way in which the
if their description is an accurate representation.
results would be reported.

Phase 1: Becoming familiar with the data

This six-phase process for thematic analysis is based on the work of Braun and Clarke and their reflexive
approach to thematic analysis (https://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/our-research/research-groups/the
matic-analysis.html).[1][42] This six phase cyclical process involves going back and forth between phases of
data analysis as needed until you are satisfied with the final themes.[1] Researchers conducting thematic
analysis should attempt to go beyond surface meanings of the data to make sense of the data and tell a rich
and compelling story about what the data means.[1] The procedures associated with other thematic analysis
approaches are rather different. This description of Braun and Clarke's six phase process also includes some
discussion of the contrasting insights provided by other thematic analysis proponents. The initial phase in
reflexive thematic analysis is common to most approaches - that of data familiarisation. This is where
researchers familiarize themselves with the content of their data - both the detail of each data item and the
'bigger picture'. In other approaches, prior to reading the data, researchers may create a "start list" of
potential codes.[43] As Braun and Clarke's approach is intended to focus on the data and not the
researcher's prior conceptions they only recommend developing codes prior to familiarisation in deductive
approaches where coding is guided by pre-existing theory. For Miles and Huberman, in their matrix
approach, "start codes" should be included in a reflexivity journal with a description of representations of
each code and where the code is established.[43] Analyzing data in an active way will assist researchers in
searching for meanings and patterns in the data set. At this stage, it is tempting to rush this phase of
familiarisation and immediately start generating codes and themes; however, this process of immersion will
aid researchers in identifying possible themes and patterns. Reading and re-reading the material until the
researcher is comfortable is crucial to the initial phase of analysis. While becoming familiar with the
material, note-taking is a crucial part of this step in order begin developing potential codes.[1]

Transcription

After completing data collection, the researcher may need to transcribe their data into written form (e.g.
audio recorded data such as interviews).[1] Braun and Clarke provide a transcription notation system for use
with their approach in their textbook Successful Qualitative Research (https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/su
ccessful-qualitative-research/book233059). Quality transcription of the data is imperative to the
dependability of analysis. Criteria for transcription of data must be established before the transcription phase
is initiated to ensure that dependability is high.[2]

Some thematic analysis proponents - particular those with a foothold in positivism - express concern about
the accuracy of transcription.[2] Inconsistencies in transcription can produce 'biases' in data analysis that
will be difficult to identify later in the analysis process.[2] For others, including Braun and Clarke,
transcription is viewed as an interpretative and theoretically embedded process and therefore cannot be
'accurate' in a straightforward sense, as the researcher always makes choices about how to translate spoken
into written text.[1] However, this does not mean that researchers shouldn't strive for thoroughness in their
transcripts and use a systematic approach to transcription. Authors should ideally provide a key for their
system of transcription notation so its readily apparent what particular notations means. Inserting comments
like "*voice lowered*" will signal a change in the speech. A general rough guideline to follow when
planning time for transcribing - allow for spending 15 minutes of transcription for every 5 minutes of
dialog. Transcription can form part of the familiarisation process.[1][13]

After this stage, the researcher should feel familiar with the content of the data and should be able to start to
identify overt patterns or repeating issues the data. These patterns should be recorded in a reflexivity journal
where they will be of use when coding data. Other TA proponents conceptualise coding as the researcher
beginning to gain control over the data. They view it as important to mark data that addresses the research
question. For them, this is the beginning of the coding process.[2]

Phase 2: Generating codes

The second step in reflexive thematic analysis is tagging items of interest in the data with a label (a few
words or a short phrase). This label should clearly evoke the relevant features of the data - this is important
for later stages of theme development. This systematic way of organizing and identifying meaningful parts
of data as it relates to the research question is called coding. The coding process evolves through the
researcher's immersion in their data and is not considered to be a linear process, but a cyclical process in
which codes are developed and refined.
The coding process is rarely completed from one sweep through the data. Saladana recommends that each
time researchers work through the data set, they should strive to refine codes by adding, subtracting,
combining or splitting potential codes.[14] For Miles and Huberman, "start codes" are produced through
terminology used by participants during the interview and can be used as a reference point of their
experiences during the interview.[43] For more positivist inclined thematic analysis proponents,
dependability increases when the researcher uses concrete codes that are based on dialogue and are
descriptive in nature.[2] These codes will facilitate the researcher's ability to locate pieces of data later in the
process and identify why they included them. However, Braun and Clarke urge researchers to look beyond
a sole focus on description and summary and engage interpretatively with data - exploring both overt
(semantic) and implicit (latent) meaning.[1] Coding sets the stage for detailed analysis later by allowing the
researcher to reorganize the data according to the ideas that have been obtained throughout the process.
Reflexivity journal entries for new codes serve as a reference point to the participant and their data section,
reminding the researcher to understand why and where they will include these codes in the final analysis.[2]
Throughout the coding process, full and equal attention needs to be paid to each data item because it will
help in the identification of otherwise unnoticed repeated patterns. Coding as inclusively as possible is
important - coding individual aspects of the data that may seem irrelevant can potentially be crucial later in
the analysis process.[1]

For sociologists Coffey and Atkinson, coding also involves the process of data reduction and
complication.[44] Reduction of codes is initiated by assigning tags or labels to the data set based on the
research question(s). In this stage, condensing large data sets into smaller units permits further analysis of
the data by creating useful categories. In-vivo codes are also produced by applying references and
terminology from the participants in their interviews. Coding aids in development, transformation and re-
conceptualization of the data and helps to find more possibilities for analysis. Researchers should ask
questions related to the data and generate theories from the data, extending past what has been previously
reported in previous research.[44]

Data reduction (Coffey and Atkinson[44])

For some thematic analysis proponents, coding can be thought of as a means of reduction of data or data
simplification (this is not the case for Braun and Clarke who view coding as both data reduction and
interpretation). For Coffey and Atkinson, using simple but broad analytic codes it is possible to reduce the
data to a more manageable feat. In this stage of data analysis the analyst must focus on the identification of
a more simple way of organizing data. using data reductionism researchers should include a process of
indexing the data texts which could include: field notes, interview transcripts, or other documents. Data at
this stage are reduced to classes or categories in which the researcher is able to identify segments of the data
that share a common category or code.[44] Siedel and Kelle suggested three ways to aid with the process of
data reduction and coding: (a) noticing relevant phenomena, (b) collecting examples of the phenomena, and
(c) analyzing phenomena to find similarities, differences, patterns and overlying structures. This aspect of
data coding is important because during this stage researchers should be attaching codes to the data to allow
the researcher to think about the data in different ways.[44] Coding can not be viewed as strictly data
reduction, data complication can be used as a way to open up the data to examine further.[44] The below
section addresses Coffey and Atkinson's process of data complication and its significance to data analysis in
qualitative analysis.[44]

Data complication (Coffey and Atkinson[44])

For Coffey and Atkinson, the process of creating codes can be described as both data reduction and data
complication. Data complication can be described as going beyond the data and asking questions about the
data to generate frameworks and theories. The complication of data is used to expand on data to create new
questions and interpretation of the data. Researchers should make certain that the coding process does not
lose more information than is gained.[44] Tesch defined data complication as the process of
reconceptualizing the data giving new contexts for the data segments. Data complication serves as a means
of providing new contexts for the way data is viewed and analyzed.[44]

Coding is a process of breaking data up through analytical ways and in order to produce questions about
the data, providing temporary answers about relationships within and among the data.[44]
Decontextualizing and recontextualizing help to reduce and expand the data in new ways with new
theories.[44]

Phase 3: Generating initial themes

Searching for themes and considering what works and what does not work within themes enables the
researcher to begin the analysis of potential codes. In this phase, it is important to begin by examining how
codes combine to form over-reaching themes in the data. At this point, researchers have a list of themes and
begin to focus on broader patterns in the data, combining coded data with proposed themes. Researchers
also begin considering how relationships are formed between codes and themes and between different
levels of existing themes. It may be helpful to use visual models to sort codes into the potential themes.[1]

Themes differ from codes in that themes are phrases or sentences that identifies what the data means. They
describe an outcome of coding for analytic reflection. Themes consist of ideas and descriptions within a
culture that can be used to explain causal events, statements, and morals derived from the participants'
stories. In subsequent phases, it is important to narrow down the potential themes to provide an
overreaching theme. Thematic analysis allows for categories or themes to emerge from the data like the
following: repeating ideas; indigenous terms, metaphors and analogies; shifts in topic; and similarities and
differences of participants' linguistic expression. It is important at this point to address not only what is
present in data, but also what is missing from the data.[14] conclusion of this phase should yield many
candidate themes collected throughout the data process. It is crucial to avoid discarding themes even if they
are initially insignificant as they may be important themes later in the analysis process.[1]

Phase 4: Reviewing themes

This phase requires the researchers to check their initial themes against the coded data and the entire data-
set - this is to ensure the analysis hasn't drifted too far from the data and provides a compelling account of
the data relevant to the research question. This process of review also allows for further expansion on and
revision of themes as they develop. At this point, researchers should have a set of potential themes, as this
phase is where the reworking of initial themes takes place. Some existing themes may collapse into each
other, other themes may need to be condensed into smaller units, or let go of all together.[1]

Specifically, this phase involves two levels of refining and reviewing themes. Connections between
overlapping themes may serve as important sources of information and can alert researchers to the
possibility of new patterns and issues in the data. For Guest and colleagues, deviations from coded material
can notify the researcher that a theme may not actually be useful to make sense of the data and should be
discarded. Both of this acknowledgements should be noted in the researcher's reflexivity journal, also
including the absence of themes.[2] Codes serve as a way to relate data to a person's conception of that
concept. At this point, the researcher should focus on interesting aspects of the codes and why they fit
together.[2]

Level 1 (Reviewing the themes against the coded data)

Reviewing coded data extracts allows researchers to identify if themes form coherent patterns. If this is the
case, researchers should move onto Level 2. If themes do not form coherent patterns, consideration of the
potentially problematic themes is necessary.[1] If themes are problematic, it is important to rework the theme
and during the process, new themes may develop.[1] For example, it is problematic when themes do not
appear to 'work' (capture something compelling about the data) or there is a significant amount of overlap
between themes. This can result in a weak or unconvincing analysis of the data. If this occurs, data may
need to be recognized in order to create cohesive, mutually exclusive themes.[1]

Level 2 (Reviewing the themes against the entire data-set)

Considering the validity of individual themes and how they connect to the data set as a whole is the next
stage of review. It is imperative to assess whether the potential thematic map meaning captures the
important information in the data relevant to the research question. Once again, at this stage it is important
to read and re-read the data to determine if current themes relate back to the data set. To assist in this
process it is imperative to code any additional items that may have been missed earlier in the initial coding
stage. If the potential map 'works' to meaningfully capture and tell a coherent story about the data then the
researcher should progress to the next phase of analysis. If the map does not work it is crucial to return to
the data in order to continue to review and refine existing themes and perhaps even undertake further
coding. Mismatches between data and analytic claims reduce the amount of support that can be provided by
the data. This can be avoided if the researcher is certain that their interpretations of the data and analytic
insights correspond.[1] Researchers repeat this process until they are satisfied with the thematic map. By the
end of this phase, researchers have an idea of what themes are and how they fit together so that they
convey a story about the data set.[1]

Phase 5: Defining and naming themes

Defining and refining existing themes that will be presented in the final analysis assists the researcher in
analyzing the data within each theme. At this phase, identification of the themes' essences relate to how
each specific theme forms part of the entire picture of the data. Analysis at this stage is characterized by
identifying which aspects of data are being captured and what is interesting about the themes, and how the
themes fit together to tell a coherent and compelling story about the data.

In order to identify whether current themes contain sub-themes and to discover further depth of themes, it is
important to consider themes within the whole picture and also as autonomous themes. Braun and Clarke
recommend caution about developing many sub-themes and many levels of themes as this may lead to an
overly fragmented analysis.[45] Researchers must then conduct and write a detailed analysis to identify the
story of each theme and its significance.[1] By the end of this phase, researchers can (1) define what current
themes consist of, and (2) explain each theme in a few sentences. It is important to note that researchers
begin thinking about names for themes that will give the reader a full sense of the theme and its
importance.[1] Failure to fully analyze the data occurs when researchers do not use the data to support their
analysis beyond simply describing or paraphrasing the content of the data. Researchers conducting thematic
analysis should attempt to go beyond surface meanings of the data to make sense of the data and tell an
accurate story of what the data means.[1]

Phase 6: Producing the report

After final themes have been reviewed, researchers begin the process of writing the final report. While
writing the final report, researchers should decide on themes that make meaningful contributions to
answering research questions which should be refined later as final themes. For coding reliability
proponents Guest and colleagues, researchers present the dialogue connected with each theme in support of
increasing dependability through a thick description of the results.[2] The goal of this phase is to write the
thematic analysis to convey the complicated story of the data in a manner that convinces the reader of the
validity and merit of your analysis.[1] A clear, concise, and straightforward logical account of the story
across and with themes is important for readers to understand the final report. The write up of the report
should contain enough evidence that themes within the data are relevant to the data set. Extracts should be
included in the narrative to capture the full meaning of the points in analysis. The argument should be in
support of the research question. For some thematic analysis proponents, the final step in producing the
report is to include member checking as a means to establish credibility, researchers should consider taking
final themes and supporting dialog to participants to elicit feedback.[2] However, Braun and Clarke are
critical of the practice of member checking and do not generally view it as a desirable practice in their
reflexive approach to thematic analysis.[13] As well as highlighting numerous practical concerns around
member checking, they argue that it is only theoretically coherent with approaches that seek to describe and
summarise participants' accounts in ways that would be recognisable to them.[13] Given their reflexive
thematic analysis approach centres the active, interpretive role of the researcher - this may not apply to
analyses generated using their approach.

Advantages and disadvantages

A technical or pragmatic view of research design centres researchers conducting qualitative analysis using
the most appropriate method for the research question.[13] However, there is rarely only one ideal or
suitable method so other criteria for selecting methods of analysis are often used - the researcher's
theoretical commitments and their familiarity with particular methods. Thematic analysis provides a flexible
method of data analysis and allows for researchers with various methodological backgrounds to engage in
this type of analysis.[1] For positivists, 'reliability' is a concern because of the numerous potential
interpretations of data possible and the potential for researcher subjectivity to 'bias' or distort the analysis.
For those committed to qualitative research values, researcher subjectivity is viewed as a resource (rather
than a threat to credibility), and so concerns about reliability do not hold. There is no one correct or
accurate interpretation of data, interpretations are inevitably subjective and reflect the positioning of the
researcher. Quality is achieved through a systematic and rigorous approach and through the researcher
continually reflecting on how they are shaping the developing analysis. Braun and Clarke have developed a
15-point quality checklist (https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/1043060/using-thematic-analysis-in-
psychology) for their reflexive approach. For coding reliability thematic analysis proponents, the use of
multiple coders and the measurement of coding agreement is vital.[2]

Thematic analysis has several advantages and disadvantages, it is up to the researchers to decide if this
method of analysis is suitable for their research design.

Advantages
The theoretical and research design flexibility it allows researchers - multiple theories can
be applied to this process across a variety of epistemologies.[1]
Well suited to large data sets.[2][1]
Code book and coding reliability approaches are designed for use with research teams.
Interpretation of themes supported by data.[2]
Applicable to research questions that go beyond an individual's experience.[2]
Allows for inductive development of codes and themes from data.[14]
Disadvantages
Thematic analysis may miss nuanced data if the researcher is not careful and uses thematic
analysis in a theoretical vacuum.[2][1]
Flexibility can make it difficult for novice researchers to decide what aspects of the data to
focus on.[1]
Limited interpretive power if analysis is not grounded in a theoretical framework.[1]
Difficult to maintain sense of continuity of data in individual accounts because of the focus
on identifying themes across data items.[1]
Does not allow researchers to make technical claims about language usage (unlike
discourse analysis and narrative analysis).[1]

Links
Thematic Analysis - The University of Auckland (https://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz/en/abou
t/our-research/research-groups/thematic-analysis.html)
Victoria Clarke's YouTube lecture mapping out different approaches to thematic analysis (htt
ps://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=4voVhTiVydc)
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke's YouTube lecture providing an introduction to their
approach to thematic analysis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zFcC10vOVY)

See also
Analytic induction Grounded theory
Case study Idea networking
Content analysis Participatory action research
Critical ethnography Phenomenography
Critical theory Quantitative research
Dialectical research Qualitative marketing research
Discourse analysis Qualitative psychological research
Educational psychology Sampling (case studies)
Ethnomethodology Sensemaking
Ethnography Theoretical sampling
Focus group

References
1. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2006). "Using thematic analysis in psychology". Qualitative
Research in Psychology. 3 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa (https://doi.org/1
0.1191%2F1478088706qp063oa). S2CID 10075179 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/Corpus
ID:10075179).
2. Guest, Greg; MacQueen, Kathleen; Namey, Emily (2012). Applied thematic analysis (https://
uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/applied-thematic-analysis/book233379). Thousand Oaks,
California: SAGE Publications. p. 11.
3. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2019). "Thematic analysis". Handbook of Research
Methods in Health Social Sciences. Hoboken, New Jersey: Springer: 843–860.
doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-981-10-5251-4_103).
ISBN 978-981-10-5250-7.
 4. Boyatzis, Richard (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code
development (https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/transforming-qualitative-information/book77
14). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Gale, Nicola; Heath, Gemma (2013). "Using the framework method for the analysis of
qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl
es/PMC3848812). BMC Medical Research Methodology. 13: 117. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-
13-117 (https://doi.org/10.1186%2F1471-2288-13-117). PMC 3848812 (https://www.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3848812). PMID 24047204 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24
047204).
6. King, Nigel; Brooks, Joanna (2016). Template analysis for business and management
students (https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/template-analysis-for-business-and-managemen
t-students/book244282). Sage.
7. Groenland, Edward (2014). "Employing the Matrix Method as a Tool for the Analysis of
Qualitative Research Data in the Business Domain". SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2495330 (http
s://doi.org/10.2139%2Fssrn.2495330). S2CID 59826786 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/Cor
pusID:59826786). SSRN 2495330 (https://ssrn.com/abstract=2495330).
8. Langdridge, Darren (2004). Introduction to research methods and data analysis in
psychology (http://catalogue.pearsoned.co.uk/catalog/academic/product/0,1144,013097832
9-IS,00.html). The Open University.
9. Hayes, Nicky (2000). Doing psychological research. Open University Press.
10. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2019). "Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis".
Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. 11 (4): 589–597.
doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806
(https://doi.org/10.1080%2F2159676x.2019.1628806). S2CID 197748828 (https://api.seman
ticscholar.org/CorpusID:197748828).
11. Willig, Carla (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. Open University Press.
12. Daly, Jeanne; Kellehear, Allan; Gliksman, Michael (1997). The public health researcher: A
methodological approach. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press. pp. 611–618.
ISBN 978-0195540758.
13. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for
beginners (https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/successful-qualitative-research/book233059).
Sage.
14. Saldana, Johnny (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (https://uk.sagepu
b.com/en-gb/eur/the-coding-manual-for-qualitative-researchers/book243616). Thousand
Oaks, California: Sage.
15. Dapkus, Marilyn (1985). "A thematic analysis of the experience of time". Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 49 (2): 408–419. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.2.408 (http
s://doi.org/10.1037%2F0022-3514.49.2.408). PMID 4032226 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/4032226).
16. Clarke, Victoria; Braun, Virginia (2014). "Thematic anaysis". Encyclopedia of Critical
Psychology. Springer: 1947–1952. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_311 (https://doi.org/10.1
007%2F978-1-4614-5583-7_311). ISBN 978-1-4614-5582-0.
17. Crabtree, B (1999). Doing Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
18. Kidder, Louise; Fine, Michelle (1987). "Qualitative and quantitative methods: When stories
converge". New Directions for Program Evaluation. 1987 (Fall) (35): 57–75.
doi:10.1002/ev.1459 (https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fev.1459).
19. Morse, Janice (1997). " "Perfectly Healthy, but Dead": The Myth of Inter-Rater Reliability" (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1177%2F104973239700700401). Qualitative Health Research. 7 (4): 445–
447. doi:10.1177/104973239700700401
(https://doi.org/10.1177%2F104973239700700401).
20. Yardley, Lucy (2008). "Demonstrating validity in qualitative psychology". Qualitative
Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. Sage: 235–251.
21. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2014). "How to use thematic analysis with interview data"
(https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-counselling-and-psychotherapy-research-handbook/b
ook239261). The Counselling and Psychotherapy Research Handbook: 183–197.
22. Terry, Gareth; Hayfield, Nikki; Clarke, Victoria; Braun, Virginia (2017). "Thematic analysis" (h
ttps://sk.sagepub.com/reference/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-research-in-psychology/i4
25.xml). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology: 17–36.
doi:10.4135/9781526405555 (https://doi.org/10.4135%2F9781526405555).
ISBN 9781473925212.
23. DeSantis, Lydia; Ugarriza, Doris (2000). "The concept of theme as used in qualitative
nursing research". Western Journal of Nursing Research. 22 (3): 351–372.
doi:10.1177/019394590002200308 (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F019394590002200308).
PMID 10804897 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10804897). S2CID 37545647 (https://api.s
emanticscholar.org/CorpusID:37545647).
24. Clarke, Victoria; Braun, Virginia (2018). "Using thematic analysis in counselling and
psychotherapy research: A critical reflection". Counselling & Psychotherapy Research. 18
(2): 107–110. doi:10.1002/capr.12165 (https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fcapr.12165).
25. Connelly, Lynne; Peltzer, Jill (2016). "Underdeveloped Themes in Qualitative Research:
Relationship With Interviews and Analysis". Clinical Nurse Specialist. 30 (1): 52–57.
doi:10.1097/nur.0000000000000173 (https://doi.org/10.1097%2Fnur.0000000000000173).
PMID 26626748 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26626748). S2CID 5942773 (https://api.se
manticscholar.org/CorpusID:5942773).
26. Sandelowski; Leeman, Jennifer (2012). "Writing using qualitative health research findings".
Qualitative Health Research. 22 (10): 1404–1413. doi:10.1177/1049732312450368 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F1049732312450368). PMID 22745362 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
22745362). S2CID 26196750 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:26196750).
27. Saldana, Johnny (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage. p. 13.
28. Creswell, John (1994). Research Design: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches (https://arc
hive.org/details/researchdesignqu0000cres). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
pp. 147 (https://archive.org/details/researchdesignqu0000cres/page/147).
29. Locke, L.F. (1987). Proposals that work: A guide for planning dissertations and grant
proposals. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
30. Creswell, John (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. pp. 178–180.
31. Lincoln; Guba (1995). "Criteria For Rigor in Qualitative research".
32. Malterud, Kirsti (2016). "Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information
Power". Qualitative Health Research. 26 (13): 1753–1760. doi:10.1177/1049732315617444
(https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1049732315617444). PMID 26613970 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/26613970). S2CID 34180494 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:34180494).
33. Guest, Greg; Bunce, Arwen; Johnson, Laura (2006). "How Many Interviews Are Enough?:
An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability". Field Methods. 18 (1): 59–82.
doi:10.1177/1525822x05279903 (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1525822x05279903).
S2CID 62237589 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:62237589).
34. Hennink, Monique; Kaiser, Bonnie (2016). "Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation:
How Many Interviews Are Enough?". Qualitative Health Research. 27 (4): 591–608.
doi:10.1177/1049732316665344 (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1049732316665344).
PMID 27670770 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27670770). S2CID 4904155 (https://api.se
manticscholar.org/CorpusID:4904155).
35. Low, Jacqueline (2019). "A Pragmatic Definition of the Concept of Theoretical Saturation".
Sociological Focus. 52 (2): 131–139. doi:10.1080/00380237.2018.1544514 (https://doi.org/1
0.1080%2F00380237.2018.1544514). S2CID 149641663 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/C
orpusID:149641663).
36. Fugard AJ, Potts HW (10 February 2015). "Supporting thinking on sample sizes for thematic
analyses: A quantitative tool" (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F13645579.2015.1005453).
International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 18 (6): 669–684.
doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1005453
(https://doi.org/10.1080%2F13645579.2015.1005453).
37. Lowe, Andrew; Norris, Anthony C.; Farris, A. Jane; Babbage, Duncan R. (2018).
"Quantifying Thematic Saturation in Qualitative Data Analysis". Field Methods. 30 (3): 191–
207. doi:10.1177/1525822X17749386 (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1525822X17749386).
ISSN 1525-822X (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1525-822X). S2CID 148824883 (https://api.
semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:148824883).
38. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2016). "(Mis)conceptualising themes, thematic analysis,
and other problems with Fugard and Potts' (2015) sample-size tool for thematic analysis" (htt
p://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/29929/3/Braun%20and%20Clarke%20Response%20to%20Fugard%2
0%2526%20Potts%20UWE%20Repository%20Version.pdf) (PDF). International Journal of
Social Research Methodology. 19 (6): 739–743. doi:10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F13645579.2016.1195588). S2CID 148370177 (https://api.semanticsc
holar.org/CorpusID:148370177).
39. Hammersley, Martyn (2015). "Sampling and thematic analysis: a response to Fugard and
Potts". International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 18 (6): 687–688.
doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1005456
(https://doi.org/10.1080%2F13645579.2015.1005456). S2CID 143933992 (https://api.seman
ticscholar.org/CorpusID:143933992).
40. Byrne, David (2015). "Response to Fugard and Potts: supporting thinking on sample sizes
for thematic analyses: a quantitative tool". International Journal of Social Research
Methodology. 16 (6): 689–691. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1005455 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F13645579.2015.1005455). S2CID 144817485 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusI
D:144817485).
41. Emmel, Nick (2015). "Themes, variables, and the limits to calculating sample size in
qualitative research: a response to Fugard and Potts" (http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/83194/3/
2-17-2016_Themes%2C%20va.pdf) (PDF). International Journal of Social Research
Methodology. 18 (6): 685–686. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1005457 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F13645579.2015.1005457). S2CID 55615136 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusI
D:55615136).
42. Braun, Virginia; Clarke, Victoria (2012). "Thematic analysis". APA Handbook of Research
Methods in Psychology. Vol. 2. pp. 57–71. doi:10.1037/13620-004 (https://doi.org/10.1037%
2F13620-004). ISBN 978-1-4338-1005-3.
43. Miles, M.B. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (https://archive.org/d
etails/qualitativedataa00mile). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. ISBN 9780803955400.
44. Coffey, Amanda; Atkinson, Paul (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data (https://uk.sagepu
b.com/en-gb/eur/making-sense-of-qualitative-data/book5617). Sage. p. 30.
45. Clarke, Victoria; Braun, Virginia (2016). "Thematic analysis" (https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/
eur/analysing-qualitative-data-in-psychology/book241179). Analysing Qualitative Data in
Psychology. Sage: 84–103.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thematic_analysis&oldid=1060257996"

This page was last edited on 14 December 2021, at 11:19 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using
this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.