I've been browsing the qual-software archives and have a question
based on something posted to the list about code-a-text a few
months ago (February) on the subject of voice recognition
software.
Alan Cartwright wrote: "Code-A-Text offers another solution. You
transfer the audio file to a digitised format (the facilities are
part of the programme) and then code against the sound file
itself. You thus always have access to the original recording
(you can do the same with video). You can then either write
precis of each segment or just transcribe those sections which
are important."
I've collected about 35 hours of conversation (2 participants
each), and am tracking interruptions, length of speaking turn,
etc., in addition to coding for "content." Not surprisingly,
transcription has been agonizing, so I am very interested
anything that might help me skip this step!
But I wonder if coding sound would be easier than
transcribing/coding text. For example, I'd guess you can't
search for certain words & code them
automatically in a sound file as (I gather) you can do with a
transcription--is this right? And how much memory would 35 hours
of audio require?
I'd be grateful if any of you could share your
thoughts/experiences on this subject.
(As you may have guessed, I haven't purchased a CAQDAS package
yet. Still trying to learn enough about them to make an
intelligent choice.)
Thanks,
Beth Young
--
Dr. Beth Rapp Young Building: LS-616, +1347
Director, University Writing Center Voice: 407-823-2853
Assistant Professor, English Fax: 407-823-3007
U of Central Florida, Orlando, 32816-1347
Email: [log in to unmask]
Homepage: http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~byoung
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|