If we are using per-defined coding from a well established and well practiced theory and there is only one coder to code the entire work submitted by participants then how can we make sure that coding is reliable? Do we really need that at the first place?
Aisha -
I agree with Marc. Consider the alternate criteria of member checking (either during interviews/observation, or if you have continued access, afterwards), peer debriefing (with a committee, with colleagues and peers - all while being mindful of anonymity), and an audit trail with memoing to track your important decision making moments.
This should help: Campbell, John L., Charles Quincy, Jordan Osserman and Ove K. Pedersen. 2013. “Coding In-Depth Semi-Structured Interviews: Problems of Unitization and Inter-Coder Reliability and Agreement.” Sociological Methods and Research 42(3)294-320.
Thanks John, your article helped a lot. My PhD thesis used data from in-depth semi-structured interviews and was coded based on grounded theory (Glaser e.a.), using only one coder. One of the reviewers raised intercoder reliability as an issue, while I never even considered a second coder using grounded theory.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Qualitative Research