Content analysis is a widely used qualitative research technique. Rather than being a single method, current applications of content analysis show three distinct approaches: conventional, directed, or summative. All three approaches are used to interpret meaning from the content of text data and, hence, adhere to the naturalistic paradigm. The major differences among the approaches are coding schemes, origins of codes, and threats to trustworthiness. In conventional content analysis, coding categories are derived directly from the text data. With a directed approach, analysis starts with a theory or relevant research findings as guidance for initial codes. A summative content analysis involves counting and comparisons, usually of keywords or content, followed by the interpretation of the underlying context. The authors delineate analytic procedures specific to each approach and techniques addressing trustworthiness with hypothetical examples drawn from the area of end-of-life care.

/pdf/three-approaches-to-qualitative-content-analysis-27iq0mo5bk.pdf

Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis

Guidelines for determining nonprobabilistic sample sizes are virtually nonexistent. Purposive samples are the most commonly used form of nonprobabilistic sampling, and their size typically relies on the concept of “saturation,” or the point at which no new information or themes are observed in the data. Although the idea of saturation is helpful at the conceptual level, it provides little practical guidance for estimating sample sizes, prior to data collection, necessary for conducting quality research. Using data from a study involving sixty in-depth interviews with women in two West African countries, the authors systematically document the degree of data saturation and variability over the course of thematic analysis. They operationalize saturation and make evidence-based recommendations regarding nonprobabilistic sample sizes for interviews. Based on the data set, they found that saturation occurred within the first twelve interviews, although basic elements for metathemes were present as early as six...

https://www.rincondepaco.com.mx/rincon/Inicio/Seminario/Documentos/Met_otros/Docs_Dra_Fleiz/Lecturas_sugeridas/Guest_data_saturation_interviews.pdf

How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability

‘In Utilization-Focused Evaluation (Patton, 1978) I suggested that if one had to choose between implementation information and outcomes information because of limited evaluation resoures, there are many instances in which implementation information would be of greater value. A decision maker can use implementation information to make sure that a policy is being put into operation according to design – or to test the feasibility of the policy. Unless one knows that a program is operating according to design, there may be little reason to expect it to produce the desired outcomes. Furthermore, until the program is implemented and a ‘treatment’ is believed to be in operation, there may be little reason even to bother evaluating outcomes. Where outcomes are evaluated without knowledge of implementation, the resuts seldom provide a direction for action because the decision maker lacks information about what produced the observed outcomes (or lack of outcomes). ... It is important to study and evaluate program implementation in order to understand how and why programs deviate from initial plans and expectations. Such deviations are quite common and natural ...’ (Patton, 1980, p 69; 1990, p. 105; Patton, 2002, p. 161)

Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.)

Aim. The aim of this paper is to distinguish the integrative review method from other review methods and to propose methodological strategies specific to the integrative review method to enhance the rigour of the process.

Background.  Recent evidence-based practice initiatives have increased the need for and the production of all types of reviews of the literature (integrative reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and qualitative reviews). The integrative review method is the only approach that allows for the combination of diverse methodologies (for example, experimental and non-experimental research), and has the potential to play a greater role in evidence-based practice for nursing. With respect to the integrative review method, strategies to enhance data collection and extraction have been developed; however, methods of analysis, synthesis, and conclusion drawing remain poorly formulated.

Discussion.  A modified framework for research reviews is presented to address issues specific to the integrative review method. Issues related to specifying the review purpose, searching the literature, evaluating data from primary sources, analysing data, and presenting the results are discussed. Data analysis methods of qualitative research are proposed as strategies that enhance the rigour of combining diverse methodologies as well as empirical and theoretical sources in an integrative review.

Conclusion.  An updated integrative review method has the potential to allow for diverse primary research methods to become a greater part of evidence-based practice initiatives.

/pdf/the-integrative-review-updated-methodology-j4hzxjmz6b.pdf

The integrative review: updated methodology

The theory of Planned Behaviour is one of the models most frequently used in the literature to explore pro-environmental behaviour including recycling, travel mode choice, energy consumption, water conservation, food choice, and ethical investment (Stern, 2000; Staats, 2003). Armitage and Conner (2001) identified its application in 154 different contexts. The Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1988) assumes that the best prediction of behaviour is given by asking people if they are intending to behave in a certain way. Here we note that the intention will not express itself in behaviour if it is physically impossible to perform the behaviour or if unexpected barriers stand in the way. Assuming intention can explain behaviour, how can intention be explained?. According to Azjen, three determinants explain behavioural intention: 1. The attitude (opinions of oneself about the behaviour); 2. The subjective norm (opinions of others about the behaviour); 3. The perceived behavioural control (self-efficacy towards the behaviour).

Michael Quinn Patton

Papers

Qualitative research and evaluation methods