The four C’s model of thematic analysis. A critical realist perspective

IF 3.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
Michalis Christodoulou
{"title":"The four C’s model of thematic analysis. A critical realist perspective","authors":"Michalis Christodoulou","doi":"10.1080/14767430.2023.2256109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThis article provides a critical realist (CR) alternative to the standard approaches to Thematic Analysis (TA) in qualitative research, namely the Braun-Clarke approach (reflexivity while coding themes), the Attride-Sterling approach (clustering basic, global and organizing themes), and Boyatzis' approach (clarifying criteria for assessing the absence/presence of themes in the raw material). In the CR traditions, the experiential themes /inferential themes /dispositional themes and the data/codes/themes distinctions have been proposed recently as the methodological device for answering the question “what is the theme”. The aim of this article is threefold. First, I bring to light the inconsistencies of the non-CR approaches to TA, second, I discuss critically the CR approaches to TA and finally I offer a CR-based approach to TA which builds upon them by introducing specific innovations from social network analysis which make abductive and retroductive reasoning a shareable procedure for answering “what is the theme?”.KEYWORDS: Connectingabstractionthematic analysisrelational mapone-mode network Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":45557,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Critical Realism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Critical Realism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767430.2023.2256109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis article provides a critical realist (CR) alternative to the standard approaches to Thematic Analysis (TA) in qualitative research, namely the Braun-Clarke approach (reflexivity while coding themes), the Attride-Sterling approach (clustering basic, global and organizing themes), and Boyatzis' approach (clarifying criteria for assessing the absence/presence of themes in the raw material). In the CR traditions, the experiential themes /inferential themes /dispositional themes and the data/codes/themes distinctions have been proposed recently as the methodological device for answering the question “what is the theme”. The aim of this article is threefold. First, I bring to light the inconsistencies of the non-CR approaches to TA, second, I discuss critically the CR approaches to TA and finally I offer a CR-based approach to TA which builds upon them by introducing specific innovations from social network analysis which make abductive and retroductive reasoning a shareable procedure for answering “what is the theme?”.KEYWORDS: Connectingabstractionthematic analysisrelational mapone-mode network Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
主位分析的4c模型。批判现实主义视角
摘要本文提供了一种批判现实主义(CR)替代定性研究中主题分析(TA)的标准方法,即Braun-Clarke方法(编码主题时的反思性)、Attride-Sterling方法(聚类基本主题、全局主题和组织主题)和Boyatzis方法(明确评估原材料中主题缺失/存在的标准)。在CR传统中,经验主题/推理主题/性格主题和数据/代码/主题的区分最近被提出作为回答“主题是什么”这个问题的方法手段。本文的目的有三个。首先,我揭示了非CR方法对TA的不一致性,其次,我批判性地讨论了CR方法对TA的影响,最后我提供了一种基于CR的TA方法,该方法建立在它们的基础上,通过引入来自社会网络分析的具体创新,使溯因和回溯推理成为回答“主题是什么?”的可共享程序。关键词:关联摘要专题分析关系mapone-mode网络披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
30.80%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信