首页> 外文期刊>Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology >Coding, sorting and sifting of qualitative data analysis: debates and discussion
【24h】

Coding, sorting and sifting of qualitative data analysis: debates and discussion

机译:定性数据分析的编码,分类和筛选:辩论和讨论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

A variety of prominent objectivist and positivist philosophical standpoints frequently attempt to ignore the extraordinary set of strengths and potentiality that qualitative data analysis (QDA) has in the social science research arena. Specifically, the notion that QDA involves non-scientific style of data collection and data analysis which comprises with coding, sorting and sifting of qualitative data, is frequently referred by many quantitative researchers to challenge or weaken the robustness and reliability of qualitative research. This paper aims to address this debate by scrutinising the nature and quality of the methods of qualitative research. By highlighting the philosophical stance of QDA, this paper tackles the criticisms of qualitative research, and also critically evaluates different approaches and perspectives of QDA. The paper finally goes on to justify that, QDA with its significantly broader attributes and extensive research capacity, in fact, involves more than the coding, sorting and sifting of qualitative data.
机译:各种突出的客观主义和实证主义哲学观点经常试图忽略定性数据分析(QDA)在社会科学研究领域所具有的非凡优势和潜力。具体而言,许多定量研究人员经常提到QDA涉及非科学风格的数据收集和数据分析(包括定性数据的编码,排序和筛选),以挑战或削弱定性研究的可靠性和可靠性。本文旨在通过研究定性研究方法的性质和质量来解决这一争论。通过突出QDA的哲学立场,本文解决了对定性研究的批评,并批判性地评估了QDA的不同方法和观点。最后,本文继续证明,QDA具有显着更广泛的属性和广泛的研究能力,实际上涉及的不仅仅是定性数据的编码,分类和筛选。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号