Qualitative Data Analysis Software and Family Science: 2011–2020 Usage Trends

IF 3.5 1区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Journal of Marriage and Family Pub Date : 2026-03-02 Epub Date: 2025-08-08 DOI:10.1111/jomf.70020
Áine M. Humble
{"title":"Qualitative Data Analysis Software and Family Science: 2011–2020 Usage Trends","authors":"Áine M. Humble","doi":"10.1111/jomf.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This brief report examines how often a technology called QDAS (qualitative data analysis software) was mentioned in family science (FS) research between 2011 and 2020 and how it was described. It also provides data about qualitative FS research trends and examines whether there is a relationship between QDAS use and grounded theory.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>QDAS is a technology used by qualitative FS scholars, but little is known about its prevalence or how it is used. Research in this area is needed because technology can influence qualitative research practices in unknown or unacknowledged ways such as methodological homogenization.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Empirical articles from five FS journals were examined for whether they presented qualitative findings during 2011–2015 and 2016–2020. Identified articles were then examined for their QDAS use. A chi-square analysis compared articles mentioning QDAS with those not mentioning it for whether they were more likely to mention grounded theory.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The percentage of qualitative research findings increased from 15% to 17% across the two time periods; in those articles, QDAS use increased from 25% to 41%. Few details were provided about how the programs were used, and a moderate relationship was found between QDAS and grounded theory.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>QDAS use is increasing in FS, and more detail needs to be provided about how it is used. This information is increasingly important due to the incorporation of automatic features into QDAS programs such as Generative Artificial Intelligence tools.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48440,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marriage and Family","volume":"88 2","pages":"554-561"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jomf.70020","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Marriage and Family","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.70020","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This brief report examines how often a technology called QDAS (qualitative data analysis software) was mentioned in family science (FS) research between 2011 and 2020 and how it was described. It also provides data about qualitative FS research trends and examines whether there is a relationship between QDAS use and grounded theory.

Background

QDAS is a technology used by qualitative FS scholars, but little is known about its prevalence or how it is used. Research in this area is needed because technology can influence qualitative research practices in unknown or unacknowledged ways such as methodological homogenization.

Method

Empirical articles from five FS journals were examined for whether they presented qualitative findings during 2011–2015 and 2016–2020. Identified articles were then examined for their QDAS use. A chi-square analysis compared articles mentioning QDAS with those not mentioning it for whether they were more likely to mention grounded theory.

Results

The percentage of qualitative research findings increased from 15% to 17% across the two time periods; in those articles, QDAS use increased from 25% to 41%. Few details were provided about how the programs were used, and a moderate relationship was found between QDAS and grounded theory.

Conclusion

QDAS use is increasing in FS, and more detail needs to be provided about how it is used. This information is increasingly important due to the incorporation of automatic features into QDAS programs such as Generative Artificial Intelligence tools.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

定性数据分析软件与家庭科学:2011-2020年使用趋势
这篇简短的报告考察了2011年至2020年期间,一种名为QDAS(定性数据分析软件)的技术在家庭科学(FS)研究中被提及的频率以及它是如何描述的。它还提供了关于定性FS研究趋势的数据,并检查了QDAS使用与扎根理论之间是否存在关系。QDAS是定性FS学者使用的一种技术,但对其流行程度和使用方式知之甚少。这一领域的研究是必要的,因为技术可以以未知或未被承认的方式影响定性研究实践,例如方法同质化。方法对2011-2015年和2016-2020年5份FS期刊的实证文章进行定性分析。然后检查确定的物品的QDAS使用情况。卡方分析比较了提到QDAS的文章和没有提到它的文章,看它们是否更有可能提到扎根理论。结果定性研究结果的比例在两个时间段内从15%上升到17%;在这些文章中,QDAS的使用从25%增加到41%。关于如何使用程序的细节很少,并且在QDAS和接地理论之间发现了适度的关系。结论QDAS在FS中的应用呈上升趋势,但其应用情况有待进一步研究。由于将自动功能纳入QDAS程序(如生成式人工智能工具),这些信息变得越来越重要。
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
12.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years, Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) has been a leading research journal in the family field. JMF features original research and theory, research interpretation and reviews, and critical discussion concerning all aspects of marriage, other forms of close relationships, and families.In 2009, an institutional subscription to Journal of Marriage and Family includes a subscription to Family Relations and Journal of Family Theory & Review.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书