What catches my attention, dear Beata, is intellectual, empirical analysis!

Please, dear Marwan share more details and secrets of particular type of it.

Based on the premise that I seek a "tentative explanation" in my research, I find grounded theory particularly useful as an approach to data analysis. Beacause of its potential for substantive theory generation from data.

Bourdieu created the method of in-depth biographical interviews, as different from life stories. I think it is an interesting method because it allows to capture biographical trajectories regarding specific topics. He has a very good article on the meaning of biographical research in sociology:

The article is in Spanish, though.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27753247?uid=307826761&uid=3737952&uid=2&uid=3&uid=67&uid=5909704&uid=62&uid=36738&sid=21104531771933

Most of my research deals with quantitative, and as a result do not have direct experience in qualitative. Here is a good reference for qualitative data analysis. Quoting from the link:

"Good qualitative data analyses also are distinguished by their focus on the inter-related aspects of the setting, group, or person under investigation—the case— rather than breaking the whole into separate parts. The whole is always understood to be greater than the sum of its parts, and so the social context of events, thoughts, and actions becomes essential for interpretation. Within this framework, it doesn’t really make sense to focus on two variables out of an interacting set of influences and test the relationship between just those two."

A few basic guidelines

• Know yourself, your biases, and preconceptions.

• Know your question.

• Seek creative abundance. Consult others and keep looking for alternative interpretations.

• Be flexible.

• Exhaust the data. Try to account for all the data in the texts, then publicly acknowledge the unex¬plained and remember the next principle.

• Celebrate anomalies. They are the windows to insight.

• Get critical feedback. The solo analyst is a great danger to self and others.

• Be explicit. Share the details with yourself, your team members, and your audiences.

http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/43454_10.pdf

Most of my work  is based on qualitative data interpretation. I like doing long interviews to get into the depth of the symptoms of issues and problems. My approach is sociological or what in USA is called social anthropological. My work that has involved the use of qualitative data falls in the category of socio-legal research or law & society research or research in sociology of law.

Dear All, thank you for support. I appreciate it.

Dear @Debi, please do not be so mysterious about the techniques you use while socio-legal data analysis, and share it with RG participants. Is it kind of content analysis or  maybe other ? Who is your inspiring author ?

Good points about "authorities are blind with pure science", Unfortunately, similar situation is in Poland. Thank you dear @Concha for your view.

Dear Beata

Socio-legal research involves studying legal institutions through their actual working rather than through doctrinal analysis of the cases delivered by the  higher judiciary. So it invoves going to the field and identifying the actors manning the system including those for whose benefit the system has been created through their decisions/cases, etc. It may involve looking into the concerned files maintained by the officials. And, the cases/decisions  are reconstructed on the basis of interviews, and a content analysis is then done, and conclusions are drawn. It is very difficult to lay access to the files in such cases.

In my case, the inspiring people are a Supreme Court judge in India, Justice Krishna Iyer, considered as a messiah of the dotrodden in my country, who gave a call to the academics to study the law in action. The second one is perhaps the most distinguished sociologist of law in India, Professor Upendra Baxi, who is presently Professor of Law & Socierty at the University of Warwick, UK. Earler on, he supervised my Ph.D research at the University of Delhi. The third is an indologist, Professor Marc Galanter, Professor of Law at the University of Wisconsin.

I appreciate your explanation, dear @Debi. Thank you

See attached paper.

Thank you dear @Joseph, for shared paper. I never thought before  I'll meet you on RG. Sometimes reading articles and books make us forget, that behind are people, "just next door" . 

Qualitative analysis capture me, because it depends on logic and reasoning.

I am an evaluator. I used to transition people from institutions into the community. We do very little of that now. We tend to put people in the streets or back into a prison. I like to work with people directly and screen their abilities instead of relying on studies.

I do like to use trusted instruments and counseling techniques. As an anthropologist I rely on direct observation in a social position within that community. then I look up research that backs up my findings.I always use more than one trusted questioner. I use them more for individual career counseling and for identifying strengths and weaknesses.

My exit project in psychology is titled, Multicultural Motivational Interviewing. I do to use statistics to much because I work with marginalized populations where statistical analysis is lacking. I relay mostly on interviewing. I am developing questions to ask. Questions that move people in a more positive direction not one that labels and stigmatizes a person. recovery is always possible and we are all in the process of becoming.

I was going to do an Applied Research Project but decided not to go through the IRB process and just develop the questioners by asking questions and researching the right questions to ask. It is a small focused group of participants with disabilities from different ethnic groups and intelligence or learning types what I asked what would improve their lives. I asked the miracle question to start with. If your life was the way you want it what would it look like. It is for a Quality of life consulting project.

I investigate people's beliefs so it is out of the realm of logic. I am working with the small end of norms to draw comparisons from: Indigenous peoples, people with disabilities, Veterans and people with disabilities, and other minority groups.Most studies focus on a group of middle class scholars. That research does not really help me except when I am working with that group. When I get a new case I do not even look at the testing and DSM diagnoses until I meet the person. I do not want to be prejudiced by them.

I prefer forensic and vocational instruments because people tend to be more honest if they are not being screened for a mental illness to be harvest by our current Behavior Health Systems and pharmaceutical companies. With indigenous people's that are traditional and have not assimilated into the dominant cultures completely asking about the past or even asking questions is considered rude, against tradition and will be met with resistance. You will not  be able to do the interview in one setting. You will have to be included in events and silently note your observations.

My undergraduate work was in Tribal Mental Wellness which is medical anthropology. I am an unlicensed traditional art therapist so I work with people who are not auditory learners. I work with dreams and imagination and improving the lives of others. I have to do my work from others perspective not my own.

It is getting easier her in the states to gain access to legal and forensic research. Before access through the internet I used to dress up as a lawyer and go to the law libraries.

Very interesting, dear @Bonita, thank you. I would read with pleasure your undergraduate work as well as the other researches.

Due to the nature of the issues and the specific type of group I investigate (cyber activist and hackers) my researches are primarily based on qualitative methods. I believe that qualitative research focused on "deeper" analysis of the phenomenon. In my research on cyber activism I am striving to get know deeply hidden motivation of the study group. I’m looking for reasons and motivation of the group. It is obvious that there is no way to extend research results to the entire population. I apply field research, where a personal relationship with the members of investigated community is very important, participant observation (often non-standard), interviews. For my research, great importance has netnography, which, inter alia, helps to identify key concepts and understand the categories used by cyber activists.

On a side note I must point out that my research and hypotheses are sometimes misunderstood by "older" generation of researchers, mainly reviewers / experts of grants ... they do not understand the specifics of the investigating environment. For example, one of the National Science Center expert didn’t understand why I want to participate in events organize for/by cyber activists (for example: hackathons, TechCamp etc.). For him, as a person who taking part in “life” of research group I become less credible, less objective.

Dear Marta, very interesting research and netnography as method also captures my mind. I know exactly what National Science Center does with qualitative grants.  But I do not give up. Qualitative traditions are still opressed by grant authorities, but as Concha mentioned in Spain is similar situation. NSC prefers team projects with lot of money involved, that were points of critics NCS reviewers made to my last qualitative project sent to NSC.  I applield for 24 months grant and  too little financial resources in their opinion and as individual researcher got suggestion to establish the team. I had a lot opportunities to laugh.

It is a scandal that when one depends on governmental auspices for grant monies, official criteria for relevance is so narrow. Whole disciplines are swept aside. Talent is disregarded.

I love qualitative analysis in the humanities as long as it is based on minutious, precise data, as in musicology or ethnoanthropology.  Of course the cutting edge nature of such disciplines makes funding woefully inadequate.  This is because research changes more rapidly than official channels for judging it. As a result, I have to finance my own research trips abroad to archives.  The final end product is so exciting and innovative-- at least to me as researcher-- that it is always worth the personal investment.

Indeed,  It is very interesting to read a research report based on qualitative data. I fully agree with dear Nelson.  I often  find it fascinating to read my research report based on qualitative data as if it is a story, with a built-in powerful theme. It is truly  joyful  to do so.

Dear @All, as can be noticed especially from the last comments, qualitative researchers have more passion and passionate researchers, than financial resources from our national scientific agendas, but what about analysis ? Can you share some interesting examples ?

Dear @Marta, I suppose you have read Robert Kozinets' concept of netnografhy or maybe not only ?

Dear @Nelson, please tall us more about  your analysis.

Dear @Larisa, I thought once about your book written with M. Yelenevskaya, and suppose this may be moving study of constructing identity in new cultural contexts. I have still in my mind your touching message on RG, about the details of meeting with new culture. Thank you. I hope to read your book in the future also because of methodology used.

Dear Beata, I like to work on factor analysis and also on structural equation modeling. 

Dear Beata

Great question - every project is different!  In general, using grounded approaches after Charmaz (2009) leads me to be keen on systematic but inductive coding of data, from which relevant theoretical perspectives emerge.  But visual spatial and modelling methods can be useful for crime data (in particular tension monitoring, or patterns of online unlawful activity) - good luck and enjoy your analysis!

Many best wishes

Susie