The quality of doctoral research has long been debated in the field of public administration, along with discussions about the need for improved methodological preparation. What is lacking, however, are discussions in public administration pedagogy about conceptual understandings regarding the use of computer-aided qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS), pedagogical strategies, and student and faculty perspectives and experiences about the use of such software programs. This article attempts to fill this gap by focusing on ways in which CAQDAS can be integrated into doctoral public administration education, the possibilities and limitations of such software, and strategies that faculty and students can use in teaching and employing such software. We also draw on lessons learned from a collaborative research project that used a qualitative data analysis software program.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AltheideD. L. (1999). Qualitative media analysis. In BrymanA.BurgessR. G., Qualitative research (Vol. 2, pp. 235–255). London, UK: Sage.
2.
AmbroseS. A.BridgesM. W.DiPietroM.LovettM. C.NormanM. K. (2010). How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
BaughJ. B.HallcomA. S.HarrisM. E. (2010). Computer assisted qualitative data analysis software: A practical perspective for applied research.Revisita del Instituto Internacional de Costos, 6, 69–81.
4.
BeckerH. (1998). Beyond the categories: Finding what doesn’t fit. In Tricks of the trade: How to think about your research while doing it (pp. 83–85). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5.
BogdanR. C.BiklenS. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
6.
BringerJ. D.JohnstonL. H.BrackenridgeC. H. (2006). Using computer assisted qualitative data analysis software to develop a grounded theory project.Field Methods, 18, 245–266.
7.
BullochS.RiversC. (2011, Spring). CAQDAS: Contributor to social scientific knowledge?Methods-News. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/1781/1/Bulloch%26Rivers_2011Methods-News_Spring.pdf.
8.
CarcaryM. (2011). Evidence analysis using CAQDAS: Insights from a qualitative from a qualitative researcher.Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 9(1), 10–24. Retrieved from http://www.ejbrm.com.
9.
CarvajalD. (2002). The artisan’s tools: Critical issues when teaching and learning CAQDAS.Forum Qualitative Social Research, 3(2), article 14. Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-02/2-02carvajal-e.htm.
10.
Center for Research Strategies. (2015). Selecting software programs for qualitative data analysis. Retrieved from http://www.crsllc.org/assets/resource-selectingsoftware-programs-for-qualitative-data-analysis.pdf.
11.
ClandininD. J.ConnellyF. M. (1998). Personal experience methods. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S., Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp. 150–178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
ClearyR. E. (1992). Revisiting the doctoral dissertation in public administration: An examination of thedissertations of 1990.Public Administration Review, 52(1), 55–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/976546.
13.
ClearyR. E. (2000). The public administration doctoral dissertation reexamined: An evaluation of the dissertations of 1998.Public Administration Review, 60(5), 446–455. doi:10.2307/976546.
14.
CousinsK.McIntoshW. (2005). More than typewriters, more than adding machines: Integrating information technology into political research.Quality & Quantity, 39, 581–614. doi:10.1007/s11135-005-3149-z.
15.
DavidsonJ.JacobsC. (2008). The implications of qualitative research software for doctoral work: Considering the individual and institutional context.Qualitative Research Journal, 8(2), 72.
16.
DavisN. W.MeyerB. B. (2009). Qualitative data analysis: A procedural comparison.Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21(1), 116–124.
17.
di GregorioS. (2000, September). Using NVivo for your literature review.Paper presented at Strategies in Qualitative Research: Issues and Results from Analysis Using QSR NVivo and NUD*IST, London, UK.
18.
di GregorioS. (2003). Teaching grounded theory with QSR NVivo.Qualitative Research Journal, 3 (Special issue), 79–95.
19.
FieldingN. (2000). The shared fate of two innovations in qualitative methodology: The relationship of qualitative software and secondary analysis of archived qualitative data.Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum (FQS), 1(3). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1039.
20.
FieldingN. G.LeeR. M. (1998). Computer analysis and qualitative research. London, UK: Sage.
21.
GeertzC. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.
22.
GeertzC. (2000). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays by Clifford Geertz (pp. 3–30). New York, NY: Basic Books.
23.
GibbsG.FrieseS.MangabeiraW. C. (2002). Using technology in the qualitative research process.Forum of Qualitative Social Research, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net.
24.
GibsonW.CalleryP.CampbellM.HallA.RichardsD. (2005). The digital revolution in qualitative research: Working with digital audio data through Atlas.ti.Sociological Research Online, 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/10/1/gibson.html.
25.
GilbertL. S. (1999). Reflections of qualitative researchers on the uses of qualitative data analysis software: An activity theory perspective. Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
26.
GilbertL. S. (2002). Going the distance: “Closeness” in qualitative data analysis software.International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 5(3), 215–228.
27.
GlaserB. (2003). The grounded theory perspective II: Descriptions of remodelling of grounded theory methodology.Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
28.
GobleE.AustinW.LarsenD.KreitzerL.BrintnellS. (2012). Habits of mind and the splitmind effect: When computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software is used in phenomenological research.Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum (FQS), 13(2), article 2. Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1709/3340.
29.
HoustonD. J.DelevanS. M. (1990). Public administration research: An assessment of journal publications.Public Administration Review, 50, 674–681. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/976978.
30.
HutchisonA. J.JohnstonL. H.BreckonJ. D. (2010). Using QSR NVivo to facilitate the development of a grounded theory project: An account of a worked example.International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 13(4), 283–302. doi:10.1080/13645570902996301.
31.
JohnW. S.JohnsonP. (2000). The pros and cons of data analysis software for qualitative research.Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 32(4), 393–397. doi:10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00393.x.
32.
JohnstonL. (2006). Software and method: Reflections on teaching and using QSR NVivo in doctoral research.International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(5), 379–391. doi:10.1080/13645570600659433.
33.
KelleU. (1995). Computer aided qualitative data analysis.London, UK: Sage.
34.
LeechN. L.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation.School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557–584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10453830.22.4.557.
35.
LewinsA. (2001). CAQDAS: Computer assisted qualitative data analysis. In GilbertN., Researching social life (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
36.
LewinsA.SilverC. (2009). Choosing a CAQDAS package. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/791/1/2009ChoosingaCAQDASPackage.pdf.
37.
LoflandJ.LoflandL. H. (1995). Analysing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wadsworth.
38.
MacMillanK. (2005). More than just coding? Evaluating CAQDAS in a discourse analysis of news texts.Forum of Qualitative Social Research, 6(3), article 25. http://www.qualitative-research.net.
39.
MangabeiraW. (1996). CAQDAS and its diffusion across four countries: National specificities and common themes.Current Sociology, 44, 191–205.
40.
Maynard-MoodyS.MushenoM. (2014). Stories for research. In YanowD.Schwartz-SheaP., Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn (pp. 338–352). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
41.
McCurdyH. E.ClearyR. E. (1984). Why can’t we resolve the research issue in public administration?Public Administration Review, 44(1), 49–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/975661.
42.
MilesM.HubermanM. A.SaldañaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43.
PaulusT. M.LesterJ. N.BrittV. G. (2013). Constructing hopes and fears around technology: A discourse analysis of introductory qualitative research texts.Qualitative Inquiry, 19(9), 639–651. doi:10.1177/1077800413500929.
44.
PerryJ. L.KraemerK. L. (1986). Research methodology in the Public Administration Review, 1975–1984.Public Administration Review, 46, 215–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3110436.
45.
PrasadP. (2005). Crafting qualitative research: Working in the postpositivist traditions. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
46.
RademakerL. L.GraceE. J.CurdaS. K. (2012). Using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) to re-examine traditionally analyzed data: Expanding our understanding of the data and of ourselves as scholars.Qualitative Report, 17(22), 1.
47.
RichardsL. (1998). Closeness to data: The changing goals of qualitative data handling.Qualitative Health Research, 8, 319–328.
48.
RichardsL. (2002). Qualitative computing: A methods revolution?International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 5(3), 263–276.
49.
RichardsT. J.RichardsL. (1995). Using hierarchical categories in qualitative data analysis. In KelleU., Computer aided qualitative data analysis (pp. 52–61). London: Sage.
50.
RossmanG. B.SF. Rallis. (2003). Analyzing and interpreting data. In Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research (pp. 267–308). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
51.
RubinH. J.RubinI. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52.
RyanM. (2009). Making visible the coding process: Using qualitative software in a post-structural study.Issues in Educational Research, 19(2), 142–159.
53.
SaldañaJ. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
54.
SealeC. F. (2000). Using computers to analyse qualitative research. In SilvermanD., Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (pp. 154–174). London: Sage.
55.
SeidelJ. (1991). Method and madness in the application of computer technology to qualitative data analysis. In FieldingN. G.LeeR. M., Using computers in qualitative research (pp. 107–116). London: Sage.
56.
SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC. (2015). Dedoose Version 6.1.18 [Web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data, Los Angeles, CA]. Retrieved from http://www.dedoose.com.
57.
StallingsR. A.FerrisJ. M. (1988). Public administration research: Work in PAR, 1940–1984.Public Administration Review, 48, 580–587. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/975522.
58.
StoutM. (2013). Preparing public administration scholars for qualitative inquiry: A status report.Public Administration Research, 2(1), 11.
59.
TaylorC.LewinsA.GibbsG. R. (2005, December 12). Debates about the software. Online QDA: Learning Qualitative Data Analysis on the Web. Retrieved from http://onlineqda.hud.ac.uk/Intro_CAQDAS/software_debates.php.
60.
Van MaanenJ. (1983). The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. In Van MaanenJ., Qualitative methodology (pp. 37–55). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
61.
WeitzmanE.MilesM. (1995). Computer programmes for qualitative data analysis: An overview. London: Sage.
62.
WeitzmanE. A. (2000). Software and qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S., Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 803–820). London: Sage.
63.
WelshE. (2002). Dealing with data: Using NVivo in the qualitative data analysis process.Forum Qualitative Research, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net.
64.
WhiteJ. D. (1986a). Dissertations and publications in public administration.Public Administration Review, 46, 227–234. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3110437.
65.
WhiteJ. D. (1986b). On the growth of knowledge in public administration.Public Administration Review, 46(1), 15–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/975438.
66.
WoodsM.MacklinR.LewisG. K. (2016). Researcher reflexivity: Exploring the impacts of CAQDAS use.International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(4), 385–403. doi:10.1080/13645579.2015.1023964.
67.
YanowD.Schwartz-SheaP. (2014). Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
