CHAPTER 10

TEXTUAL DATA ANALYSIS

Contents
Introduction
formulating a project-specific plan of analysis
Search data
The cyclical process of analysis
Thick description
Comparison
Categorizing and conceptualizing
Categorizing
Conceptualizing
Theory development
What is inductive theory ?
Why development theory
How to development theory
Grounding theory
Evaluating quality

Objectives
After reading this chapter you will :
- understand how to apply the tasks in the analytic cycle;
- appreciate inductive and deductive elements of
- understand how to make a thick description of data.
- be able to identify strategies for comparison.
- develop skills for categorizing and conceptualizing data;
- understand inductive theory development.
- understand how to evaluate the quality of textual data analysis

Introduction
 In this chapter we continue the process of data analysis following the analytic cycle
(shown at the beginning of Part III. on page 201). We suggest beginning by making an analysis
plan to focus your analytic tasks and provide a guide to review your progress. We then discuss
the core tasks in the analytic cycle; description, comparison, categorization, conceptualization
and theory development. These tasks are closely interlinked and are conducted in a circular
manner, with tasks often repeated and conducted simultaneously.
Description is a core analytic task that provides the foundation of data analysis, and
uncovers the context of behavior which can provide clues to social or cultural meaning.
Comparison is the next task that allows you to further define and explore issues and begin to
notice patterns in the data. Categorization is a task that involves grouping codes with similar
attributes into broad categories. Categorization is closely linked with conceptualization, which
involves visualizing your data as a whole to develop a conceptual understanding of the issues.
Both categorization and conceptualization move analysis to a higher level of abstraction and
provide the building blocks for theory development, the final task in the analytic cycle, which
moves qualitative research beyond description and into the realm of explanation, to provide a
broader conceptual understanding of the social phenomenon studied. Part of empirical theory
development is verifying that the theory developed is grounded (or well supported) by data
In this chapter we highlight both the inductive and deductive elements of data analysis.
Both these elements link the analytic cycle back to the original design cycle, thus bringing the
qualitative research cycle full circle.

Formulating a project-specific plan of analysis

Embarking on the analysis of qualitative data can seem overwhelming because of the
large volume of data you have and the tangle of issues it contains. Initially you may feel like you
are drowning in data with no clear strategy to navigate the analysis process. Throughout this
chapter we discuss the broad process of analysis and the analytic tasks that you will use.
However, it is useful to begin by developing a project-specific plan of analysis that will guide
you through analysis of your data and lead to answering your research questions.
Developing a project-specific plan of analysis will provide you with a
roadmap of specific issues on which to focus your analysis. There is no format for a plan of
analysis; it simply needs to be a guide that helps you progress through your analysis. However it
is useful to write down your plan of analysis, even though this may change as the analysis
progresses; this will enable you to keep track of the analysis tasks completed, identify areas
missed and review your progress. In developing your plan of analysis you may consider the
overall purpose of your analysis, the level of analysis needed to meet this purpose and then
identify specific topics, questions, areas or codes on which to begin your analysis. These areas
are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Consider the overall purpose of your analysis. For example, are you trying to answer a
specific research question? Do you want to generally explore a topic? Are you identifying issues
to be used in a survey? Your plan of analysis should focus towards this goal. This may seem
obvious, but there are often a multitude of topics, questions, or interesting aspects you could
explore in your data and it is easy to lose focus of the overall purpose of the analysis. It is good
practice to write down the purpose of your analysis at the beginning of your plan, so that you
stay focused on this broad goal.
Consider the level of analysis that is needed to meet the purpose of your research. If your
purpose is to write a descriptive account of an issue or to identity issues for a survey, then you
may only need to use description and comparison in your analysis (these are the first tasks
described in this chapter). However, if the purpose of your study is to develop an explanation or
theory about certain behaviour then you would need to conduct all the tasks related developing a
grounded theory.
A plan of analysis may simply consist of a series of codes, topics and questions you wish
to explore in the data to answer your research question. But where do you begin? Which topics
or codes should you start with? There may be a specific question or code that is central to your
study and a logical place to begin your analysis, or you may simply begin with a code that you
find interesting. Start by writing down a question and identifying all the codes from the
codebook that seem relevant to explore in order to answer the question. This then becomes the
first task in your plan of analysis. Continue to identify questions or codes in the same way until
you have a range of core issue to explore the analysis. Textual data analysis involves gradually
building up the by focusing on small components in the data (a code, a topic, a equation, etc.)
gaining a detailed understanding of each component and then moving the next. Also consider
practical issues in your plan of analysis, for example, if you know that a specific topic or issue
simply did not yield useful data then exclude it from the plan Also, if several researchers are
working together you may each focus on a different question or specific group of codes, so that
the analysis is built up as a group.

Searching data
Searching data is a fundamental task that is conducted throughout the process of analysis
it involves selecting a code or series of codes from your codebook and searching data for each
segment of text where the code is mentioned, then reading these text extracts and developing an
understanding of the issue. Searching data by codes allows you to focus your analysis on one
issue at a time and slowly build up your analysis. It is important to remember that searching the
data by codes will simply retrieve the segments of text you have coded with a specific code,
therefore if data coding was inconsistent or incomplete this will be reflected in the data searches.
There are many ways to search the data and several strategies are summarized in Table
10.1. Some strategies are used more often with particular analytic tasks: for example, a code or
topic search is most often used during description, while a search by subgroups is used more
during comparison.
Table 10.1 Data search strategies
Search by A basic search that is continually repeated during analysis. Used most
code frequently description (see section on Description).
Select a single code from the codebook and search data b identify each segment
of text where the code is mentioned. Read all retrieved text to get a detailed
understanding of the code. For example, searching for a code stress. may
reveal how people tal about stress and different experiences or contexts of
stress.
Search by A search that uses several codes around a specific top.c. UsefLi si desaiplion
topic (see section on Thick description).
Select codes from the codebook that relate to a specdc toc. Search each code
ndeidualy (soe search by code above) lo build a detailed understanclng of the
topic For
example, the topic al participants knowledge of tubercufosis. may be explored
uswig
codes of source of knowledge s,1nptoms. causes, myths and treafmenr.
Explorng
 each code w! lead to a detailed understandwig of participants knowledge of the
causes. syrriptoms and treatment of tuberculosis, their sources of knowledge
and
myths about The disease
Search by A search that locuses on a specific subgroup of participants. Used as a basic
subgroup search
loi CQrflausor1 or categOrizing (see Sections on Corrarlson and
Categorization).

ldently a subgroup of participants by their demographic characteristics (e.g.

young
women or married men) or experience (e.g. ami illness, miscarriage) Then
select only
this sungroiip of participants and 5earCh for codes within the subgroup. Foi
exarrle,
within a subgroup of employed men, search or the code stress, then select
another
subgroup of unemployed men and search for stress, Then compare whether
stress
s discussed differentty by men with a ob and without. This type of search is
most
easily done using a quabtatve analysis soliware package.
Analytic A search that locuses on a specific question, Used most often in
search conceplualizatic
( see section on Conceptualization),

Think of a question that can be answered by the data, then select a range of
codes
from the codebool k, help you search the data to answer the question. For
exarrle.
ask yourself is there a corw,ect,on between work arad stress?, ideriMy codes
tO h
 explore this Issue (e.g stress and work or sob). then search data for text
labelled
both codes stress and worx or stress and job, read the text retrieved lo see it
the
way partlopants disoj stress and work Su99e515 a relaticiship between these
COd

Searching the data is made easier by using a data analysis program (e.g. Atlas.ti, NViro,
MAXQDA). However, no program will do the analysis for you, these programs will facilitate
manipulating the large volume of data in qualitative research allow you to do more complex
searches and conduct analysis more quickly, which is extremely helpful during data analysis
Although you can search data without the assistance of a computer package, it is more
cumbersome and time consuming.
During the process of analysis you will conduct many data searches; some of these will
lead to important findings, some will be unfruitful and others will generate ideas, thoughts and
questions for further data searches. Therefore, it is important to have a system for documenting
your searches and the outcomes of searches as you progress through your analysis so that you
keep an analytic trail. Even unfruitful searches should be documented, not only so that you do
not repeat the same search hut also in case what appear to be unfruitful searches turn out to be
significant later in the analysis. Keeping a trail of your data searches and what you found from
each is much simpler if using a data management program. Where you can save, date and label
your searches, keep memos about your analysis and add or refer to these as your analysis
progresses.

The cyclical process of analysis

Qualitative data analysis comprises a range of core analytic tasks: developing codes,
description, Comparison, categorization conceptualization and theory development. These tasks
are closely interlinked: not only are the conducted in a circular manner whereby tasks are
repeated during data analysis, but they are also often conducted simultaneously at different
points in the analysis. The circular nature of qualitative data analysis is important as it enables
you to go deeper into the data and develop a more refined understanding of the issues. The core
tasks and circular process of data analysis are reflected in our analytic cycle.
In addition to the circular nature of data analysis, it may also be viewed as an analytic
spiral (Dey,1993), as shown in Figure 10. 1 As you move through the analytic tasks in a circular
manner, you are simultaneously moving up an analytic spiral and building up your analysis. You
move up the spiral from description towards explanation of data (or theory development). As you
begin to develop explanations you also validate (or ground) these explanations by returning to
the data, moving down the spiral. The process of analysis involves continuously moving up and
down the analytic spiral as you develop theory and then validate it with the data. In this way
qualitative data analysis may be seen as an inductive conceptual cycle, whereby the process of
analysis leads to the development of inductive concepts and theory that are verified with the data
(as opposed to deductive theory development which is what you may begin with in the design
cycle as you developed your study; see Part I)

Tabel 10.1

Thick description
Description is the first task in the analytic cycle (see diagram at beginning of Part III,
page 201). Description forms the foundation of qualitative data analysis and provides the rich
detail that is sought m qualitative research. By developing a detailed description of the issues in
your data, you become very familiar with each issue, understand how issues are interlinked, the
subtle nuances surrounding issues, and you will begin to understand the issues from the
perspective of your study participants. All of this provides you with unique and valuable insight
into your data. Description is therefore an important analytic tool that can be used to develop
powerful and engaging accounts of events, processes, or social phenomena in your data.
Although description is the first analytic task, it is used throughout the data analysis process.
Qualitative data analysis typically involves making a thick description of your data. This
term was developed by the cultural anthropologist Clifford Geertz (1973), who explained that a
thick description involves not only describing a particular behaviour but also the context within
which that behaviour occurs. it is the context that gives the behaviour a social or cultural
meaning and helps
us to understand its symbolic importance. In ofltract, a thin des( Flption w4d
only the behaviour or Jction Geertz useiJ the example of a wink to
highlight the importance of including COfltXt in description A Wiflk rna
a cxual meaning if observed betw1 a couple, while in a professiOnal Setting
it may indicate a gesture of SUpport or among friends it may show that
someones comment was meant as a ioke. Developing a thick dcuiption i
therefore fttndamental to fully understanding the meaning of the behaviours nr
actions in your data and will provide a foundation for later conceptualizing and
explaining behaviour.
Developing a thick description is an inductive activity that involves reading the data and
delving deeper into each issue by exploring its context, meaning and the nuances that surround it.
Description allows you to notice connections and relationships between issues that become
useful later when developing explanations. It also helps you to notice patterns of issues within
the data for example, some issues may be mentioned repeatedly, and certain issues may be
often mentioned together, suggesting a connection between specific issues.
Making a thick description typically involves focusing on part of the data,
such as a single code, a broader topic, process, or particular behaviour. You then
search the data (see strategies in Table 10.1) for all related text, read the extracts of text retrieved
and begin to develop a thick description. In making a thick description of your data, consider the
depth, breadth, context and nuance of each issue, to build up a detailed description about
different aspect of each topic or issue. The following questions will guide you in making a
thick description of a code, issue or topic.

Depth What is the issue? Why is it an issue?

What happens? How is it described?
How can you define/describe the issue?
How does it differ from other issues? What makes it distinct?

Breadth Are there different dimensions or variations of the issue?

 What is the range of perceptions or Opinions about the issue?
How do these dimensions or perceptions vary, and what makes each distinct?
Is there any pattern to the issue across the data?
Are some dimensions mentioned more frequently than others?
Do any dimensions cluster by subgroups of participants?
Context What is the context of the issue? (When. where, how does it happen?)
How do participants discuss the issue? (What words, emotion, expressions do they
use?) bout me issue?
What meaning or explanations are given discussed together?
Are certain dimensions of the issue often
Nuance Is the issue discussed differently in different circumstances or contexts?
What are these nuances?
What reasons are given for differences?
Are these nuances linked to particular types of participants?

Table 10.2 show an example of a thick description of a code called time from data on
access to health services in Malawi Although this example is shown in table form, a thick
description can also be a Written narrative. The five questions at the top of Table 10.2 are used to
develop and structure this description; however, you can use other questions that suit your
project. The first column shows that there were nine distinct aspects of time in these data (travel
time, waiting time, etc.), each with a distinct context and meaning. For example, waiting time
refers to the long waits experienced at public health clinics, compared to short waits at private
Facilities. How each dimension discussed is also important; for example, waiting time was
discussed with anger and despair, cost of time with concern and travel time with complacency
or acceptance. These subtle insights can provide valuable access to participants views and
experiences. Furthermore, some aspects are quite nuanced; for example, time of day highlights
the fact that service quality varies depending on the time of day the service is used, and cost of
time highlights the non-monetary cost of using the health service, whereby health conditions
often worsened while waiting for service at the clinic. A thick description of this kind really
opens up the data for exploration of the dimensions and subtle nuances of each issue, and this
level of descriptive detail is extremely valuable in later stages of analysis when building an
explanatory theory.

This thick description also highlights sonic patterns across the data. For example waiting time
was the most frequently mentioned aspect, consultation time the least frequent; and travel
time and lost time were most often mentioned by rural participants. In addition, the description
highlights other codes that are often mentioned together with various aspects of time. For
example, another code called service quality often intersects with some dimensions of time
(e.g. consultation time, staff time, time of day and speed of service). Noticing these patterns can
guide your further exploration of the data. For example, you may then decide to conduct a thick
description of the code service quality to examine how different aspects of time influence the
quality of service provision.

Description is the first task in the analytic cycle and an important component of grounded theory.
However, description alone does not make a grounded theory analysis. A grounded theory
analysis progresses further around the analytic cycle. from description towards theory
development. While including description. theory development involves going beyond
description to include interpretation. explanation, prediction and theory development about the
phenomenon studied.

Tabel 10.2
Tabel 10.2

These explanations may be validated by description, include descriptive details or use the
nuances uncovered in descriptive analysis to refine theory development. Thus, description is both
a precursor to theory development and a component of it. So, while description does not
constitute theory development, description an essential component to theorizing from textual
data. Strauss and Corbin (1998: 19) stress that although description clearly is nor theory, it is
basic to theorizing. Therefore, in grounded theory researchers need to use description but go
beyond description towards conceptualizing data and theorizing from data. Perhaps a unique
strength of qualitative data analysis, and the grounded theory approach in particulars is its
potential to move beyond description to develop comprehensive frameworks of concepts that
derive from the data, which are then used to theorize about social phenomena.

Comparison

Comparison is the second task in the analytic cycle. Comparison allows you to further explore
issues, identify patterns and begin to notice associations in the data, as you begin to move up the
analytic spiral depicted in Figure 1O.1. Comparison is typically used early in data analysis, often
together with description While description is used to identify and describe issues in the data,
comparison can further refine these issues by clarifying what makes each issue distinct from
others; it can uncover patterns of each issue in the data and begin to identify the nature of links
between issues Comparison is also used in later stages of data analysis to define categories of
codes and when developing explanations (rom the data these applications of comparison will be
described later.

There are many ways to approach comparison Table 10.3 outlines several strategies for
comparison; these are not exhaustive or mutually exclusive and are simply intended to provide a
starting point for making comparisons in your data The first strategy listed is cross-case
comparison, which involves comparing a single issue across tile entire data set, for example,
comparing how the issue of shame is discussed in different interview and what makes each
experience of: shame different or similar. This type of comparison is most commonly used when
making a thick description (see section on Description above).

The other strategies for comparison that are listed in Table 10.3 focus on comparing an issue by
different subgroups of participants These comparisons identify whether certain issues are
mentioned only by a defined subgroup of Participants or whether the issue is discussed
differently by each subgroup. Comparison by subgroups of participants allows you to identify
patterns and meanings in the data that may not be obvious from simply reading data. Comparison
can therefore facilitate uncovering distinctions in the data that
Tabel

provide the foundation for explaining issues and developing theory. For example, a study in the
Asian community in the UK found that young Muslim women were embarrassed to consult with
male doctors for family planning services, particularly if the doctor was from the same cultural
and religious background as they were (Hennink et al., 1999a). This specific finding emerged
after multiple comparisons by subgroups. First, the code embarrassment was compared by
gender to find that the issue was only mentioned by women. Second, a comparison by age found
that it was younger women who were most concerned about embarrassment. Third, comparison
of young women by their religion found that Muslim women voiced the greatest concerns about
embarrassment. Fourth, comparing the comments from the young, Muslim women who raised
the issue of embarrassment highlighted different nuances

in the issue; tot example, if the doctor was of the same cultural and rdiious

background, the women teared being negatively pudged by the doctor for

seeking advice on contraception; t ti-ic doctor was from the same community,

they feared that their consultation would he revealed to others in the commu

nity, however, if the doctor was of nonsian background, women did not

report issues of judgement or wnfidentialitv hut would only feel embarrassed

if an examination was required, These patterns and subtle nuances in the code

embarrassment are revealed by using constant comparison to fully explore

and define the iie. When conducting comparisons by demographic charac

teristics you need to make sure that you have this information for all partici

pants. Often demographic information is collected separately from the inter

view data, perhaps in a brief survey before an interview (see the methods

chapters in Part I).

Comparison can be between deductive subgroups and inductive subgroups

of participants. Deductive subgroups may have already been identified in the

design cycle when designing the study, and are often socio-demographic

subgroups (e.g. gender, age group, marital status). Comparison by deductive

subgroups is the most commonly used, perhaps because it is easiest to conduct.

However, comparison by inductive subgroups is equally important as it can

often yield fruitful and unexpected discovcries. Inductive subgroups are more

subtle and emerge from the data during the analysis. For example, a study on

breast cancer prevention in China identified that some participants believed

that fate was the cause of the disease, comparisons were then conducted

between two inductiC subgroups of women, those who believed in fatalism

and those who did not. SimiLarl a study in Pakistan entihed that womens
decisions cofltraepti5e usC were strongly influenced by a mother-in-law

who resided in the househOltl This led the researchers to develop two indLiC

who lived with their mother-in-law and those

tive subgroups of women those made between these two inductive

who did not. Comparisons we!

of hcalt1 elat udes Comparboll by inductive

subgroups on a range

subgroups can therefore identify lmp0t voriltiofl5 and nUances Ui the Jata