 |
 |
John - > >In regard to code mapping, I'm not sure what you mean. If it is that your >coding is displayed on the screen embedded in the text, so that you can see >the work that you have already done, then I don't think this works against >intensive coding. Yes, If you have a lot of short segments, and a lot of >code words per segment, things can get a little crowded. But when you do a >search, you can see the output segments with or without the coding. >Further you can expand the context of the search output with or without the >embedded coding. well - first I did not mean to suggest that the coding process was difficult -far from it - but what i meant to say was - that if you rely on a VISUAL display of how a file is coded as a whole and many people like to work like this - (i.e. not coded retrieval) - code mapping is nice - but if there is too much coding embedded in a file - the code headers identifying the start points of each segment break up the data - making the file rather long and broken up - (if, for instance printing out) In fact in your Appendix E, which I found extremely useful, you say "the trick is to avoid intensive coding early in the process" - referring to Agars (1991) analytic alternatives. Of course you were not referring to the code mapping tool at the time - but rather to the process of "preliminary sorting and sifting to generate candidates for the intensive analsyis described by Agar". I suppose I picked up on that because you go on to describe a nice mix and match of approaches - where some members of the research team are reading a few -(presumably) broadly coded segments - generated by outputting them from the software and then intensively analysing those segments by mulling them over -scribbling and and annotating them by hand. I think I interpolated that to mean (and I felt it myself while experimenting with the software) one has a better sense of those broad segments when looking at the file as a whole - if there are not too many segments broken up by very detailed, intensive coding. that reference: Agar, Michael (1991, 1994) The Right Brain Strikes Back, in Using Computers in Qualitative Research, N. Fielding and R. Lee, eds. Sage. regards Ann Lewins Resource Officer, CAQDAS Networking Project Dept of Sociology University of Surrey GUILDFORD GU2 5XH email: [log in to unmask] CAQDAS web site: http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/caqdas/ Tel +44 (0)1 483 259 455 Fax +44 (0)1 483 259 551 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%