Assume one has open-ended questions in a survey and seriously wants to analyze the answers to these questions. This text discusses a number of choices when a thematic text analysis is to be applied. It starts with requirements to be posed of the open-ended questions themselves and sketches choices in the development of a code system. Coding can be performed from an instrumental or a representational perspective. First, the coding is performed from the investigator’s point of view, and can be performed by a computer program. Secondly, the point of view of the respondent is acknowledged. Here, the computer can be used as a management tool, but the coding must be performed by a human coder. The choice of one of these methods depends on what the investigator is looking for and has consequences for how to proceed. When the representational coding is applied, there are questions of intercoder reliability. The codes to be used should be decided upon before or during the coding process.
BogdanRCBiklenSK (2002) Qualitative Research for Education. An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston MA: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
BrugidouM (2003) Argumentation and Values: An Analysis of Ordinary Political Competence via an Open-ended Question. International Journal of Public Opinion Research15(4): 413–30.
3.
ContasMA (1992) Qualitative Analysis as a Public Event: The Documentation of Category Development Procedures. American Educational Research Journal29(2): 253–66.
4.
ConverseJM (1984) Strong Arguments and Weak Evidence: The Open/Closed Questioning Controversy in the 1940s. Public Opinion Quarterly48(1B): 267–82.
5.
ConversePE (1964) The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. Ideology and Discontent. In: ApterDE (ed.) Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press: 206–61.
6.
CrittendenKSHillRJ (1971) Coding Reliability and Validity of Interview Data. American Sociological Review36(6): 1073–80.
7.
FribourgORosenvingeJH (2013) A Comparison of Open-ended and Closed Questions in the Prediction of Mental Health. Quality and Quantity47(3): 1397–411.
8.
GeerJG (1988) What Do Open-ended Questions Measure?Public Opinion Quarterly52(3): 365–71.
HeinrichHA (1996) Traditional versus Computer Aided Content Analysis. A Comparison between Codings Done by Raters as well as by Intext. In: FaulbaumFBandillaW (eds) SoftStat’95. Advances in Statistical Software5. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius: 327–33.
11.
HolstiOR (1969) Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. London: Addison Wesley.
12.
HruschkaDCummingsBCobb St. JohnDMooreJKhumalo-SakutukwaGCareyJW (2004) Fixed-choice and Open-ended Response Formats: A Comparison from HIV Prevention Research in Zimbabwe. Field Methods16(2): 184–202.
13.
IkerHP (1974) An Historical Note on the Use of Word–frequency Contingencies in Content Analysis. Computers and the Humanities8(1): 93–98.
14.
JacksonKMTrochimWMK (2002) Concept Mapping as an Alternative Approach for the Analysis of Open-ended Survey Responses. Organizational Research Methods5(4): 307–36.
15.
KammeyerKCWRothJA (1971) Coding Responses to Open-ended Questions. In: CostnerHL (ed.), Sociological Methodology1971. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
16.
KrippendorffK (2012) Content Analysis. An Introduction to its Methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
17.
KrosnickJA (1999) Survey Research. Annual Review of Psychology50: 537–67.
18.
KurasakiKS (2000) Intercoder Reliability for Validating Conclusions Drawn from Open-ended Interview Data. Field Methods12(3): 179–94.
19.
LazarsfeldPF (1944) The Controversy over Detailed Interviews - An Offer for Negotiation. Public Opinion Quarterly8(1): 38–60.
20.
LindermanA (2001) Computer Content Analysis and Manual Coding Techniques: A Comparative Analysis. In: WestMD (ed.) Theory, Method, and Practice in Computer Content Analysis. Westport: Ablex, 97–109.
21.
McCollEJacobyAThomasLSoutterJBamfordCSteenNThomasRHarveyEGarrattABondJ (2001) Design and Use of Questionnaires: A Review of Best Practice Applicable to Surveys of Health Service Staff and Patients. Health Technology Assessment5(31): 1–256.
22.
MontgomeryACCrittendenKS (1977) Improving Coding Reliability for Open-ended Questions. Public Opinion Quarterly41(2): 235–43.
23.
PoppingR (2012) Human or Machine Coding in Text Analysis. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique115: 79–88.
24.
PoppingRRobertsCW (2009) Coding Issues in Modality Analysis. Field Methods21(3): 244–64.
25.
RobertsCWPoppingR (1993) Computer Supported Content Analysis. Some Recent Developments. Social Science Computer Review11(3): 283–91.
26.
Schonhardt-BaileyC (2005) Measuring Ideas More Effectively: An Analysis of Bush and Kerry’s National Security Speeches. PS, Political Science and Politics38(3): 701–11.
27.
ScholzEZüllC (2012) Item Non-response in Open-ended Questions: Who Does Not Answer on the Meaning of Left and Right?Social Science Research41(6): 1415–28.
28.
SchumanHPresserS (1981) Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys. New York: Academic Press.
29.
ShapiroG (1997) The Future of Coders: Human Judgments in a World of Sophisticated Software. In: RobertsCW (ed.) Text Analysis for the Social Sciences: Methods for Drawing Statistical Inferences from Texts and Transcripts. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 225–38.
30.
SmythJDDillmanDAChristianLMMcBrideM (2009) Open-ended Questions in Web Surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly73(2): 325–37.
31.
Van der EijkCIrwinGANiemöllerB (1988) Dutch Parliamentary Election Panel-Study 1981-1986. Amsterdam: Steinmetz Archives, Dutch Interuniversity Election Workgroup.
