It depends on the field. You could use corpus linguist methodology, for example, to determine key words (deductive) and issues or ethnomethodology to identify processes. Grounded theory (especially constructed grounded theory) or comparative case studies (where you pick out key points and then construct the case for comparative analysis) uses a more inductive approach

Dear Nyarai,

The method you choose to analyse has to correlate with your research design and research objectives. Please find attached some literature on your query.

All the Best!

http://catalog.flatworldknowledge.com/bookhub/reader/3585?e=blackstone_1.0-ch02_s03

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3848812/

http://atlasti.com/qualitative-research-methods/

Nyari

Another option is to combine deductive and inductive analysis in abductive analysis and to be transparent about that.Best wishes with your research.

Terry Barrett 

You can use both of them, inductive and/or deductive. Some qualitative methods can be used by using inductive and deductive approaches - like thematic analysis, while grounded theory assumes inductive approaches. My personal opinion is that qualitative studies are more suitable for inductive approaches.

It depends on your research objective and research design as Malini Ganapathy also stated. Just refer to literature on resesearch design, clearly state oobjective and you will find the best approach. You can read about study design in the following books:

[1] Catherine Marshall and Gretchen B. Rossman. Designing Qualitative Research, Fifth Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 2011.

[2] Matthew B. Miles, A. Michael Huberman and Johnny Saldaña. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, Third Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks, US. 2013

Enjoy your research.

I would say that you can choose either of the separately, but you should not try to do both simultaneously. In general, you should use a deductive approach when you have strong pre-existing theory to guide your analysis. 

If you are talking about building a coding system, another alternative is what is known as a "hybrid" approach,. This means that you begin your analysis with a set of deductively generated codes, and then add additional codes that you discover inductively as you work with the data.

With regard to abduction, this means you can alternate back and forth between the two -- such as formulating a hypothesis inductively and then pursing it deductively. There has been considerable discussion of abduction lately within the Grounded Theory literature, which you might find helpful even if you are not explicitly doing GT. 

To me the choice gets to whether you want to answer a question (or test a hypothesis) or find out what's going on. I just came from a wonderful seminar with the National Communication Association here in the U.S. with a group of qualitative scholars, and one of our faculty members put it this way: when you use an inductive/abductive method like grounded theory, you want to know what's going on. When you use quantitative methods or deductive analysis, you have an idea what's going on, and want to disprove or prove it. (Null hypothesis.)

Of course you CAN combine the two. But then you would likely have to deal with the often contradictory epistemological (and, indeed, methodological) issues that you might encounter / have encountered when attempting to do so. The smart choice is to do what Terry suggested above and go for an abductive approach to theory building (Peirce, 1932). There is a nice paper which deals with this by Timmermans and Tavory:

Timmermans S and Tavory I (2012) Theory Construction in Qualitative Research: From Grounded Theory to Abductive Analysis. Sociological Theory 30(3):

167–186.

incidentally, if you are adopting a critical realist philosophical stance, rather than a purely constructivist approach, such as used in 'modern' GT as per Kathy Charmaz, then Bhaskar uses the term retroduction (and credits this to Hanson) rather than abduction, to mean the same process, or as near as makes no difference really. 

Look up literature about abduction,

I think I am at this stage of exploration as well. I tend to agree with Laura that a practical guiding principle is whether we want to find out more about certain social phenomenon or we want to test a hypothesis or theory developed somewhere else in your local context. For an area like sociology, I think they are so many things going on at the same time - something which is true at certain time zone and place may differ in different context. A lot of questions is not a yes/no thing. I suppose providing some reasonable, sensible and practical perspective to a situation is rather useful. All the best to your study. Regards.

I am doing a qualitative study, I used conceptual framework, interviews and focus group discussions. Can I use inductive and deductive analysis?

Think it is possible to use both inductive & deductive analysis in a qualitative study depending on your research requirement.  Alternatively, you can emulate a qualitative study that use both inductive & deductive analysis from the literature that you'd reviewed.  Scenario of using inductive & deductive analysis are depicted below:

It depends on your research question, your research design and how much work has been done in that specific area previously. My paper, which is about analysis of focus groups, "briefly" discusses the difference between inductive and deductive analysis and offers a framework for an inductive analysis of focus group data:

Nili, A., Tate, M., & Johnstone, D. (2017). A Framework and Approach for Analysis of Focus Group Data in Information Systems Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 40, 1. 

Although analysis of focus group data for "Information Systems" researchers has been mentioned in the title of this paper, the paper is relevant to many other research fields. We are using the analysis framework for many of our current academic and industry research projects here in Australia and New Zealand.

Thank you, Alireza 

It looks like you have been guided in very useful directions already but if you need one more insight, it is to consider how theory plays into your research. Are you wanting to start with a theory and build from it, test it (deductive) or are you instead looking to develop your own theory (inductive)? Good luck!