I am going to use in-depth interview and Focus group discussion to collect data related to resilience, vulnerability, and co-management of a fishing community.How can I analysed the collected data?
A lot depends on what your goals are. One general approach that is very popular is thematic analysis as described by Braun & Clarke (2006).
Thematic analysis is the common method to analyse focus groups and in-depth interviews.
It depends on your profile as a researcher and your objectives. Grounded theory is a good choice if your interested in conceptualisation.
@ Bob Lew: Hi Bob, how are you doing? The Sage handbook remains an essential source book. The works of Barney Glaser are still worth reading though they move outside the mainstream. Check the site of sociology press. The Discovery of Grounded theory remains a classic, but you cannot read it one to one without being aware that it dates back to the sixties and at that at that time these were voices from the margin of the discipline, from California and from medical sociology. The relationship between GTM and constructivism is worth reflecting as well as the effect of software like e.g. Atlas.ti. Yours Charles
Generally agree with all of the above. However, I suggest that Kathy Charmaz's implementation of Grounded Theory---which I have recently used---is most practical to follow (Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd. edition, 2014).
Hello, Mohammad,
Do you know the COREQ? It stands for Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research, and it is a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. It was very helpful for me.
http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/6/349
I also suggest taking a look at the Supplement to International Journal of Behavioral Development, 37(6), 2013. It is a special edition on qualitative research methods. You may find various methods of data analysis. Hope it helps!
http://www.issbd.org/resources/files/spjbd_37_6S.pdf
Thematic analysis is the best way to analyse qualitative data
Good luck
Thematic analysis will do. If your objective was to go for Grounded theory you can do it that way. Otherwise thematic analysis will bring out the solution.
I thank you
I agree with Katrina-Kuna-thematic analysis would be the most relevant approach to analyse your data. You can work out your themes from the structure of your research questions as your interviews are structured around these questions.
For starters, read Clifford Geertz's "Thick Description" in his The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays (1973). Then sympathetically introspect a la Cooley's "The Roots of Social Knowledge'!
Use thematic analyses as suggested by others. This will help you to understand your key points of focus; that is, resilience, vulnerability and the co-management.
Thematic analysis. We now have some Computer Aided Qualitative Data Analysis Programme such as NVivo that does good work too.
Agree with the above in applying thematic analysis of your data. Found NVIVO a very good tool for coding interview transcripts and although some of the add in functions such as the mind mapping tool are basic they can be useful in helping to structure your themes.
Well they said it all!
My advice would be: read a dissertation or MA thesis that used thematic analysis, in order to understand the method better.it takes time but it's abetter way than reading a handbook or chapter about thematic analysis.
I support Steven Byers, to use Nvivo for coding interview transcripts. Provided you come up with sound coding framework and able to use it.
One of my favorite references on this subject is H. Russell Bernard, "Research Methods in Anthropology" (Fourth Edition in 2006). In Chapter 9, on pages 232-239, there are very good pointers and information on how to conduct and analyze focus groups. Through Google, this work is sometimes available as a free PDF eBook.
I think it is still the classical categorial content analysis advocated by Bardin and others. We can mix this classic approach with more current elements and programs such as NVivo - but nothing - can replace classic analysis. At first, all interviews must be transcribed in integrity and then subjected to a thematic content analysis "fast and effective as long as it applies to direct speeches" (Bardin, 1979: 153). The construction of the categories is made from the thematic areas that made up the script of the interview. It should be noted that "the use of these techniques may represent a fundamental aid in the interpretation of the data, and can often generate decisive evidence for the theoretical inferences that are the purpose and fundamental objective of the research" (Navarro & Díaz 1994: 195).
This analysis will allow the construction of fundamental categories for the interpretation of the data, making it possible to generate decisive evidence for the theoretical inferences that are the fundamental purpose of the investigation. It should be emphasized that narratives are generally the object of an analysis of vertical content, and are then subjected to a horizontal analysis of content respecting the understanding of the current analysis. The aim is to give different, specific and meaningful, but interrelated discursiveness in a relational social space of actors and territories. Content analysis was also supported by the use of NVivo, which is a tool for gathering, organizing and analyzing content of interviews, documentary research, audio, online social networks and web pages. With NVivo you can analyze the data in detail using powerful search, query and visualization tools. In order to understand and even test certain ideas, using NVivo software, some qualitative data mining techniques have been used. Subsequently, we analyze networks of references of people and spaces, fundamental to identify strategies and relational capitals in the subfield of the independent edition in Portugal. Here, it was also the site of exploration of some networks through the use of NodlesXLS as a tool for drawing and presenting networks of actors and spaces.
I would guess that it depends on the ontology and epistemology that guides the study. I would use Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis as directed by Smith, Flowers and Larkin (2009) published by Sage.
