Content analysis or thematic analysis

作者
Niklas Humble,Peter Mozelius
标识
DOI:10.34190/ecrm.21.1.316
摘要

Research has a long tradition of quantitative research which still dominates many university courses on research methods. Qualitative research is a younger phenomenon that was established in research after the second world war. An emerging research field that needed new analysis methods tailored for qualitative data. Two of the most frequently used approaches in qualitative data analysis are content analysis and thematic analysis. In several aspects content analysis and thematic analysis both share a common approach to analytically examine qualitative data, and the fact that they have been used interchangeably has made it difficult for the more unexperienced researchers to distinguish and choose between them. The aim of this study is to examine doctoral students’ perceptions of qualitative analysis with content analysis and thematic analysis. The study had a qualitative approach with data collected from two webinars on qualitative data analysis, where a total of 76 doctoral students participated. Data consists of participant reflections in a Padlet on content analysis and thematic analysis at the two webinars. Webinar participants have given their consent to use their reflections in the Padlet for research. Content analysis with an abductive coding approach was used to analyse the collected data and formulate categories that answer the study’s aim and research question. Results show both perceived similarities and differences between content analysis and thematic analysis. Both are perceived to have a similar process in the coding of data, although content analysis has a wider selection of coding approaches and thematic analysis support deeper immersion. Content analysis is also perceived as more practical and straightforward, while thematic analysis is perceived as more intuitive and faster to learn. Both content analysis and thematic analysis are perceived to have individual opportunities and challenges that make them appropriate for different types of research. Findings presented in this study can be used by researchers at any level to explore similarities and differences between content analysis and thematic analysis, and where to apply them in research.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
1秒前
1秒前
林夕完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
2秒前
elegant122完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
3秒前
不留名应助Cool采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
3秒前
3秒前
3秒前
4秒前
4秒前
兵王应助侯天宇采纳,获得10
4秒前
elegant122发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
夜见发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
6秒前
1111发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
9秒前
DRpeng发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
xttju2014发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
SciGPT应助Season采纳,获得30
10秒前
12秒前
酷波er应助自信晟睿采纳,获得10
13秒前
13秒前
Salut发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
1111完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
15秒前
csy发布了新的文献求助10
15秒前
18秒前
上官若男应助DRpeng采纳,获得10
18秒前
19秒前
19秒前
20秒前
JamesPei应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
20秒前
烟花应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
20秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Rosenblum, Global Change Biology 800
Essentials of Carbohydrate Chemistry and Biochemistry, 4th Edition 800
Organizational Behavior 510
Management and the Arts 510
Matrix Methods in Data Mining and Pattern Recognition Second Edition 510
Physiologic specialization in Peronospora manshurica 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 工程类 有机化学 物理 复合材料 生物化学 内科学 细胞生物学 基因 遗传学 免疫学 冶金 光电子学 癌症研究
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7777297
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 9318392
关于积分的说明 20363957
捐赠科研通 7364423
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3318922
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2466578
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2334129