Hi-
After reading this message (and working out the abbreviations!! :-) ) I just
wanted to add in me tuppence ha'penny. Like I don't have any work to do but
here goes.
I'm not familiar with decision explorer first-hand, but when Ian's original
question was posted a number of things popped into my head.
1) nVivo strikes me as one package that is suited to analysis from a GT
perspective, as it is versatile and more subtle than some other packages.
2) But that depends on the size of the project - if you have an awful lot of
data NUDIST might be more appropriate. It's a bit of a balancing act.
3) Brian's idea of using NUDIST first before importing into DE is an
interesting one, but it might over-complicate things for you. If you have a
small-to-medium sized project, I'd go for nVivo which is versatile enough to
code and map aspects of the data. NOTE: both NUDIST and nVivo have memo
capabilities.
4) However, if DE really does have good graphical capabilities, it might be
interesting to use it at a later stage for good representation. Depends on
financial and IT resources available to you.
5) Brian's final paragraph raises an issue which seems to be popping up
everywhere and is the focus of increasing debate. Indeed, at the recent
'Strategies in Qualitative Research' Conference held in September, this
issue was raised over and over again. There is a feeling that the growth of
Computer-Aided Qual Analysis is exposing some fundamental weaknesses in the
practice of qual research. A number of reasons have been put forward to
explain this from different quarters. Have a look at the report in the
archives of qual-soft
(http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?S1=qual-software), or in the FQS
on-line journal (the relevant issue has not been released quite yet, will
put up address when it has been).
That's all for now,
Regards
Sarah Delaney
PS Brian - is the weather as horrific in Cork as it is in Maynooth, or is it
just a midlands phenomenon? :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: O'Flaherty, Brian <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 29 November 2000 18:31
Subject: Re: Grounded Theory through Cognitive Mapping
>Ian,
>A coding based, constant comparison method is central to Grounded Theory.
>Decision Explorer(DE) would not provide a Coding capability, for computer
>assisted development of coding schemes.
>These can be referential or interpretive codes, that aid data reduction
>etc., So the first coding phase of GT, i.e. opening coding, would not be
>supported by the software. It wouldn't naturally fall into the code and
>retrieval classification of Qual. analysis S/w. I would classify it as a
>cognitive mapping/ Network Analysis tool.
>This does not stop you from manually assigning categories from your primary
>data and representing these in DE, after all Cognitive Mapping uses the
same
>qualitative data.
>DE does have a memo capability, which is an important aspect of GT. You can
>outline your interpretations and justify how you deduced a code from a
piece
>of data.
>But DE would be very useful in graphical analysis of Hierarchical Coding
>Frames and axial coding and selective coding could be facilitated. DE is
>also strong in graphical printing etc.,
>
>If you compare DE to the QSR product range it is interesting to note that
>DE, NUD*IST and NVivo allow file transfer. The developers of both systems
>collaborate and this would indicate that the systems compliment each other,
>rather then compete, as they come from different philosophical backgrounds.
>Nud*ist and Nvivo are more suited to GT, while Cognitive mapping comes from
>(Kelly, 'The psychology of personal constructs', Norton, 1955) and Eden &
>Ackermann, 'Making Strategy' Sage, 2000. You could use NUD*IST for the
>initial coding and import the categories into DE and work from there.
>
>I don't know the context of your question but this raises other issues. Why
>use GT in the first place? What is the essence of cognitive mapping and as
a
>method how does it support your research question? Are you falling into the
>trap of being 'Software Tool' driven rather than applying methods based on
>fit to research design?
>
>Finally, you could use DE to support some aspects of GT, but choose your
>research method, before you choose your software.
>
>Hope this is of use,
>Regards,
>
>Brian O'Flaherty
>Information Systems,
>University College Cork, IRELAND.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Yeoman, Ian [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 28 November 2000 21:28
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Grounded Theory through Cognitive Mapping
>
>
>Has anybody used decision explore / cognitive ampping as a a platform for
>grounded theory?
>
>Ian Yeoman
>Napier University
>
>-
>
|