Do you have any concrete suggestes about the methodological tools to handle abduction?
I find that sorting an categorizing the data by coding is not satisfactory, and are looking for an interpretative approach, perhaps hermeutics.
Abduction would mean starting from a set of observations to form a tentative hypothesis (induction), and then reasoning out the implications of that hypothesis (deduction). For example, you might formulate a coding system, and then apply it. Or you might search for a pattern in the results from your coding system, and then assess how well that pattern fits the data. As those example illustrate, much of the process of coding in qualitative analysis is actually abduction, and has been mistakenly labelled induction. So, if you are unhappy with what you learn from coding, abduction is not likely to be a solution.
Perhaps the problem comes from treating coding as leading to categories? That leaves you stuck at the level of description when what you want is conceptualization and interpretation. Unfortunately, this is a very common problem in qualitative analysis. As an alternative, try asking: Why are these categories the main elements in the data? And, how are these categories related to each other?
Abduction would mean starting from a set of observations to form a tentative hypothesis (induction), and then reasoning out the implications of that hypothesis (deduction). For example, you might formulate a coding system, and then apply it. Or you might search for a pattern in the results from your coding system, and then assess how well that pattern fits the data. As those example illustrate, much of the process of coding in qualitative analysis is actually abduction, and has been mistakenly labelled induction. So, if you are unhappy with what you learn from coding, abduction is not likely to be a solution.
Perhaps the problem comes from treating coding as leading to categories? That leaves you stuck at the level of description when what you want is conceptualization and interpretation. Unfortunately, this is a very common problem in qualitative analysis. As an alternative, try asking: Why are these categories the main elements in the data? And, how are these categories related to each other?
Thank you for your detailed answer, in particular the second paragraph. Another reason why I am a little bit confused is that abduction seems to be an integrated part of grounded theory approaches, but also implies a certain way of looking at data and theory creating innovation. Is this right? It may, but do not have to be linked to grounded theory. At the same time it seems to be a reasoning that can be applied with several methodological approaches. For instance:
First;"Abductivity refers to a creative inferential process aimed at producing new hypotheses and theories based on surprising research evidence. " (Timmermans and Tavory 2012).
Secondly,;it may or may not be used with grounded theory approaches,
"Aduction is far from being the privilege of grounded theory methodology".
Third; Abductive analysis involves a recursive process of double-fitting data and theories (Timmermans and Tavory, 2012).
There are also other refererences highlighting the fact that abductive reasning may be applied with other methodological approaches (fex Bertilsson 2004, Navarro 2017). Thus, I am thinking of being inspired by the reasoning of abductiveness, and combining it with a (hopefully) non--coding (as in grounded theory coding) way of analysis.
Are there any OK examples of this combination? (not narrative and discourse appoaches)?
There has been a greater recognition of the role of abduction within grounded theory, and especially constructivist grounded theory (e.g. Kathy Charmaz and Anthony Bryant), but the logic involved applies to pretty much any form of qualitative analysis. Whether you use coding or not, abduction will begin with observations that produce a tentative conclusion, followed by tracing out the implications of that tentative conclusion.
From David's post above then, one can argue that generally, data analysis inherently moves through abduction>induction>deduction.
Abduction basically is the movement back and forth between induction and deduction.
- Badges
- Science topic