A deductive approach implies that you have a prior set of criteria that determines what you want to study.For data collection, this is often a set of hypotheses that will guide what you ask, while an inductive approach would be more exploratory. Similarly, a deductive approach to analysis would start with a pre-existing coding system. while an inductive approach would be guided by the data themselves.

The interpretive stance is thus exploratory and relies on your own actions to interpret the data, rather than using any kind of system that is derived from earlier work or theory.

David L Morgan -- I appreciate your input on this question because I have struggled similarly with my dissertation proposal. I have observed a phenomenon in adult vocational certification programs and want to explore what underlies the phenomenon -- interpretive, even having an application for your and Dr. Nica's ITI analysis method to extract themes from data I gather through interviews using the Critical Incident Theory framework. Right now, however, I'm having difficulty breaking free from the IRAC model that has guided my professional, non-academic writing for a couple of decades.

I wonder if you or other gurus in this field have suggestions on how to successfully bridge deductive and inductive approaches without engaging in a full-on mixed methods study.

When your analysis is working entirely with qualitative qualitative data, I often recommend a hybrid approach (Fereday and Muir-Cochrane, 2006). This begins with a set of deductively predetermined coding categories and then adds to them to inductively as the coding proceeds.

In their current version of Thematic Analysis, Braun and Clarke distinguish three versions: purely inductive, hybrid, and deductive. Their preferred version, which they call Reflexive TA, is purely inductive, and they primarily contrast it with the deductive version, and thus say little about the hybrid alternative.

But as Billie R McNamara notes, I have my own approach to qualitative data analysis, called Iterative Thematic Inquiry (Morgan and Nica, 2021), which is available for download here. What I advocate is to develop your themes from the beginning of the data collection process, rather than waiting for a separate anlysis phase. So "coding" plays a very different role in Iterative Thematic Inquiry, where it is primarily used at a later stage in the analysis process as a way to ensure that the themes you have created during your ongoing analysis process do indeed fit the data.

Thank you, David L Morgan . I am excited to peruse your recommendations.

ITI thus far fits perfectly with my idea for the research design because I already know the phenomenon exists. I casually call it the "magic moment," but it is properly an identifiable instance of metacognitive epiphany I have observed in students in post-secondary workforce credentialing programs and workplace training for years.

I can relate the "magic moment" to Perry's Scheme informally, because academic maturity is part of the process. Most of all, I can observe changes (usually imperceptible to others at first) in the students' self-agency over their learning. Because I intend to interview the learners after the magic moment occurs, Critical Incident questioning provides a structure.

When I read your paper about ITI, I had my own lightbulb moment because I can continue structured investigation while remaining in the QUAL/QUAL zone that fits this study.

My purpose of the study is to report personal experiences, not statistics, in the hope curriculum and accreditation policymakers will take notice and adapt their credentialing preparation programs to meet the needs of emerging workers in highly technical vocations.

Billie R McNamara Thank you for your good words. I think no one seriously believes in the idea of a researcher as a "blank slate," but at the same time we have been slow in confronting how to make use of our prior experiences as a factor in our research. Of course, there is a continuing emphasis of "reflexivity," but I argue that we need to develop concrete means to accomplish that. So having a clear awareness of your starting point is an important element for your ongoing reflexivity.

And I like your emphasis on how people have moments of unique realization that lead to a change in beliefs. As a pragmatist, I have a strong interest in how experiences both shape beliefs and are in turn shaped by those beliefs. So the question of how changes in beliefs and experiences go together is a central issue in my particular "paradigm."