I have attached one of my publications that discusses some possible uses for counts of codes as a form of Qualitative Content Analysis. The basic idea is to look for patterns in the occurrence of the codes and then return to the qualitative data to generate explanations for those patterns.

A different approach that some people consider to be mixed methods is to convert the qualitative data to set of counts that are then analyzed quantitatively. In this case, the data is collected qualitatively, but all of the analysis is done quantitatively, and I personally have doubts about calling that "qualitative research."

Article Qualitative Content Analysis: A Guide to Paths Not Taken

Does number or count make sense in qualitative research?

I think is fine provided we use maths / calculation sensibly / appropriately.  E.g. during qualitative data analysis, we still need to use count in order to identity there is a pattern / trend on certain occurrences of phenomena, aggregation of theme A + theme B might yield theme C, majority (through calculation & comparison) of the participants / informants' comments lead us into deeper / further investigation from a specific angle etc.

The following papers may also help: 

• Maxwell, J. A. (2010) Using Numbers in Qualitative Research, Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 6, pp. 475-482.
• Sandelowski, M. (2001) Real qualitative researchers do not count: the use of numbers in qualitative research, Research in nursing and health, 24, 3, pp. 230-240.
• Sandelowski, M., Voils, C. I. and Knafl, G. (2009) On quantitizing, Journal of mixed methods research, 3, 3, pp. 208-222.

Usually in a qualitative study, number or count does not matter with the exception of a few qualitative research where we can quote the results in terms of counts or frequency

I agree with my colleagues how gave answers already. Qualitative if purely used numbers does not count unless interpretated for qualitative patterns. Justification for that, if numbers used then threatening the quality of research due to sampling error. Wish you all the best

Actually there is no meaning of counts in interpretive approach, however, the number may be important in saturating the knowledge, perception, feelings....of the research question being investigated.

I believe that number or count can be used when they serve to reinforce some results. A good option is to carry out a quantitative and qualitative analysis.

Have great work!

The idea of qualitative research is that it doesn't become as reductionist as "counting" offers.  However that is not to say the two forms cannot be reconciled.  Content analysis is a very quantitative qualitative methodology and is widely used.  I would really suggest supplementing the data with larger, more in depth qualitative enquiry.  The following paper might be of some use:

Counting in Qualitative Research: Why to Conduct it, When to Avoid it, and When to Closet it by David R. Hannah Brenda A. Lautsch

You can find the paper that Sergio A. Silverio mentioned at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Hannah2/publication/254117926_Counting_in_Qualitative_Research_Why_to_Conduct_it_When_to_Avoid_it_and_When_to_Closet_it/links/0a85e531df03d2f3ed000000.pdf

I would also recommend Joseph Maxwells' "Using Numbers in Qualitative Research" https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joseph_Maxwell/publication/258181991_Using_Numbers_in_Qualitative_Research/links/55cb2ec008aea2d9bdcc27d1.pdf

Article Counting in Qualitative Research: Why to Conduct it, When to...

Article Using Numbers in Qualitative Research

David, thanks for the links to the Hannah & Lautsch paper (and to Sergio for mentioning this) and to your paper; I hadn't seen these. The version of my paper that is posted on ResearachGate doesn't have the final source reference for this; it was published in Qualitative Inquiry 16(6), pp. 475-482 (2010).  

Hi all, I'm attempting to count the instances of code mentions for a set of interviews. I'm unsure of the way to proceed when the interviewee may allude to a theme (one code), quickly digress and mention something else and then go back to the original point they were making. Would I count this as two mentions within the interview, or one? Thanks!

I would count it as one mention, because what's important is the number of INTERVIEWEES who mention a theme, not the number of mentions. If one interviewee returned to a theme 13 times, it would be seriously misleading to simply report this as 13 mentions.

The problem you are describing is sometimes referred to as "unitizing," i.e., the division of qualitative data into countable units. This its particularly difficult when you are working with extended semi-structured interviews. For the kind of quantitative content analysis that you are describing, the standard practice is to divide the interviews into units before assigning codes. If you cannot do that, you might consider counting "mentions," which would be anytime a participant mentions something codable.

If you are trying to do a detailed quantitative analysis of a number of qualitative interviews, David Morgan's strategy makes sense. However, if you simply want to indicate how prevalent a particular issue was in the interviews, then a simple count ("five of the 18 interviewees mentioned the issue of . . .") is quite adequate. Keep in mind that there is no inherent generalizability to this finding; this would require both a fairly large number of interviews, and some evidence that the interviewees were representative of the population to which you intend to generalize.

Yes,it does.

an interview should have a specified kind ..,medical religous etc...

Not really and even the sharing of single participant might be much more important and logical than the responses from multiple participants who are in wrong direction.

I love this thread. Thank you for your engagement in this, it is very useful. I do agree with Joseph that it will be most useful to count the number of interviewees who mention a theme rather than the number of mentions. And I do think it is useful to count also in qualitative research.