Deductive Qualitative Analysis: Evaluating, Expanding, and Refining Theory

IF 3.9 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Stephen T. Fife, Jacob D. Gossner
{"title":"Deductive Qualitative Analysis: Evaluating, Expanding, and Refining Theory","authors":"Stephen T. Fife, Jacob D. Gossner","doi":"10.1177/16094069241244856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although qualitative research is often equated with inductive analysis, researchers may also use deductive qualitative approaches for certain types of research questions and purposes. Deductive qualitative research allows researchers to use existing theory to examine meanings, processes, and narratives of interpersonal and intrapersonal phenomena. Deductive qualitative analysis (DQA; Gilgun, 2005, 2019) is one form of deductive qualitative research that is suited to theory application, testing, and refinement. Within DQA, researchers combine deductive and inductive analysis to examine supporting, contradicting, refining, and expanding evidence for the theory or conceptual model being examined, resulting in a theory that better fits the present sample and accounts for increased diversity in the phenomenon being studied. This paper acts as a primer on DQA and presents two worked examples of DQA studies. Our discussion focuses on the five primary components of DQA: selecting a research question and guiding theory, operationalizing theory, collecting a purposive sample, coding and analyzing data, and theorizing. We highlight different ways of operationalizing theory as sensitizing constructs or as working hypotheses and discuss common pitfalls in theory operationalization. We divide the coding and analyzing process into two sections for parsimony: early analysis, focused on familiarity with the data, code generation, and identification of negative cases, and middle analysis, focused on developing a thorough understanding of evidence related to the guiding theory and negative cases that depart from the guiding theory. Theorizing occurs throughout as researchers consider ways in which the theory being examined is supported, refuted, refined, or expanded. We also discuss strengths and limitations of DQA and potential difficulties researchers may experience when utilizing this methodology.","PeriodicalId":48220,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Qualitative Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241244856","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although qualitative research is often equated with inductive analysis, researchers may also use deductive qualitative approaches for certain types of research questions and purposes. Deductive qualitative research allows researchers to use existing theory to examine meanings, processes, and narratives of interpersonal and intrapersonal phenomena. Deductive qualitative analysis (DQA; Gilgun, 2005, 2019) is one form of deductive qualitative research that is suited to theory application, testing, and refinement. Within DQA, researchers combine deductive and inductive analysis to examine supporting, contradicting, refining, and expanding evidence for the theory or conceptual model being examined, resulting in a theory that better fits the present sample and accounts for increased diversity in the phenomenon being studied. This paper acts as a primer on DQA and presents two worked examples of DQA studies. Our discussion focuses on the five primary components of DQA: selecting a research question and guiding theory, operationalizing theory, collecting a purposive sample, coding and analyzing data, and theorizing. We highlight different ways of operationalizing theory as sensitizing constructs or as working hypotheses and discuss common pitfalls in theory operationalization. We divide the coding and analyzing process into two sections for parsimony: early analysis, focused on familiarity with the data, code generation, and identification of negative cases, and middle analysis, focused on developing a thorough understanding of evidence related to the guiding theory and negative cases that depart from the guiding theory. Theorizing occurs throughout as researchers consider ways in which the theory being examined is supported, refuted, refined, or expanded. We also discuss strengths and limitations of DQA and potential difficulties researchers may experience when utilizing this methodology.
演绎定性分析:评估、扩展和完善理论
虽然定性研究通常等同于归纳分析,但研究人员也可以针对某些类型的研究问题和目的使用演绎定性研究方法。演绎定性研究允许研究人员使用现有理论来研究人际和人内现象的意义、过程和叙述。演绎定性分析(DQA;Gilgun, 2005, 2019)是演绎定性研究的一种形式,适合理论应用、测试和完善。在 DQA 中,研究人员将演绎和归纳分析结合起来,对所研究的理论或概念模型的支持、矛盾、完善和扩展证据进行检验,从而得出更适合当前样本的理论,并解释所研究现象中更多的多样性。本文是 DQA 的入门读物,介绍了两个 DQA 研究的实例。我们的讨论重点是 DQA 的五个主要组成部分:选择研究问题和指导理论、操作理论、收集目的性样本、编码和分析数据以及理论化。我们强调了将理论操作化为感性建构或工作假设的不同方法,并讨论了理论操作化过程中的常见误区。我们将编码和分析过程分为两个部分,以求简明扼要:早期分析侧重于熟悉数据、生成代码和识别负面案例;中期分析侧重于透彻理解与指导理论相关的证据和偏离指导理论的负面案例。理论化贯穿始终,因为研究人员会考虑如何支持、反驳、完善或扩展所研究的理论。我们还讨论了 DQA 的优势和局限性,以及研究人员在使用这种方法时可能遇到的困难。
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
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
International Journal of Qualitative Methods SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
139
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal Highlights Impact Factor: 5.4 Ranked 5/110 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary – SSCI Indexed In: Clarivate Analytics: Social Science Citation Index, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Scopus Launched In: 2002 Publication is subject to payment of an article processing charge (APC) Submit here International Journal of Qualitative Methods (IJQM) is a peer-reviewed open access journal which focuses on methodological advances, innovations, and insights in qualitative or mixed methods studies. Please see the Aims and Scope tab for further information.
×
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