At 10:36 AM 7/25/02 +0100, you wrote:
>I would keep it and mark it as irrelevant so that you don't go through the
>process of obtaining it again, then assessing it and THEN realising that
>it's of no use - again. You don't mention technologies, but you should be
>able to label it as irrelevant somehow and depending on volume store it
>separately from you relevant data. It might be that something which seems
>irrelevant early on in a project might be something you want to look at
>again later, in which case you have it to hand too.
>
>Duncan
>
>===================================================
>Duncan Branley [log in to unmask]
> Applications Officer, Information Services
> Goldsmiths' College, University of London
> New Cross, LONDON SE14 6NW
>Tel: +44 (0)20 7919 7708 Fax: +44 (0)20 7919 7556
>===================================================
This brings up an interesting issue that I'm working through at the moment.
I have a relatively large collection of data (not huge mind you... about 800 pages,
which is still a lot to code). I started out using NUD*IST and quickly found myself
wanting to code *everything* because I could. That is, while coding I would tag bits
of text for typical things that repeat often within the data. I started doing this out of
the anxiety that I might miss something by not tagging every single line in my documents.
After spending several days on just one document and mulling through dozens of codes,
my anxiety changed to worry that I'd never complete the project!
To resolve the issue (and keep moving forward on completing the project), I stopped
using NUD*IST temporarily for coding, and started doing everything on paper the
old-fashioned way. I'm still using NUD*IST to search and retrieve pertinent subsets
for coding in this fashion, and I'm using the system's text unit addressing system
to reference units.... but I have yet to enter these codes back into the software program.
My question... Is this a typical struggle for new users of Qualitative software packages?
Yes I know that there are many different approaches to qualitative research. My
approach in this project is focused on conceptual discovery, elaboration, and the
development of theory. I may later be interested in comparing frequencies of phenomena,
but not now.
Since the software is so good at storing coding references, does anyone else worry
about losing the forest for the trees? Perhaps someone has some recommendations
for maximizing the power of QDA software while still staying focused on the conceptual
development. [In re-reading this, it seems like a naive question, but I'm going to ask it
anyway. Please feel free to respond on or off list... experiences and strategies with
different systems are welcome.]
Thanks in advance,
/Corey
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Corey J. Colyer
Research Associate
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Data Archive
ICPSR - The University of Michigan
(734) 615-9526 [phone]
(734) 998-9259 [fax]
(888) 741-7242 [toll-free helpline]
http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/SAMHDA
[log in to unmask]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|