Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation

An oft-cited phenomenological methodologist, Max VAN MANEN (2014), claims that qualitative data analysis software (QDAS) is not an appropriate tool for phenomenological research. Yet phenomenologists rarely describe how phenomenology is to be done: pencil, paper, computer? DAVIDSON and DI GREGORIO (...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Brian Kelleher Sohn
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: FQS 2017-01-01
Series:Forum: Qualitative Social Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2688
id doaj-8c40bf63c35f4a6199e2f0bac4a30532
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8c40bf63c35f4a6199e2f0bac4a305322020-11-25T00:52:31ZdeuFQS Forum: Qualitative Social Research1438-56272017-01-011811839Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful ReconciliationBrian Kelleher Sohn0The University of TennesseeAn oft-cited phenomenological methodologist, Max VAN MANEN (2014), claims that qualitative data analysis software (QDAS) is not an appropriate tool for phenomenological research. Yet phenomenologists rarely describe how phenomenology is to be done: pencil, paper, computer? DAVIDSON and DI GREGORIO (2011) urge QDAS contrarians such as VAN MANEN to get over their methodological loyalties and join the digital world, claiming that all qualitative researchers, whatever their methodology, perform processes aided by QDAS: disaggregation and recontextualization of texts. Other phenomenologists exemplify DAVIDSON and DI GREGORIO's observation that arguments against QDAS often identify problems more closely related to the researchers than QDAS. But the concerns about technology of McLUHAN (2003 [1964]), HEIDEGGER (2008 [1977]), and FLUSSER (2013) cannot be ignored. In this conceptual article I answer the questions of phenomenologists and the call of QDAS methodologists to describe how I used QDAS to carry out a phenomenological study in order to guide others who choose to reconcile the use of software to assist their research. URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1701142http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2688phenomenologyqualitative data analysis softwarequalitative research
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Brian Kelleher Sohn
spellingShingle Brian Kelleher Sohn
Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation
Forum: Qualitative Social Research
phenomenology
qualitative data analysis software
qualitative research
author_facet Brian Kelleher Sohn
author_sort Brian Kelleher Sohn
title Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation
title_short Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation
title_full Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation
title_fullStr Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation
title_full_unstemmed Phenomenology and Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS): A Careful Reconciliation
title_sort phenomenology and qualitative data analysis software (qdas): a careful reconciliation
publisher FQS
series Forum: Qualitative Social Research
issn 1438-5627
publishDate 2017-01-01
description An oft-cited phenomenological methodologist, Max VAN MANEN (2014), claims that qualitative data analysis software (QDAS) is not an appropriate tool for phenomenological research. Yet phenomenologists rarely describe how phenomenology is to be done: pencil, paper, computer? DAVIDSON and DI GREGORIO (2011) urge QDAS contrarians such as VAN MANEN to get over their methodological loyalties and join the digital world, claiming that all qualitative researchers, whatever their methodology, perform processes aided by QDAS: disaggregation and recontextualization of texts. Other phenomenologists exemplify DAVIDSON and DI GREGORIO's observation that arguments against QDAS often identify problems more closely related to the researchers than QDAS. But the concerns about technology of McLUHAN (2003 [1964]), HEIDEGGER (2008 [1977]), and FLUSSER (2013) cannot be ignored. In this conceptual article I answer the questions of phenomenologists and the call of QDAS methodologists to describe how I used QDAS to carry out a phenomenological study in order to guide others who choose to reconcile the use of software to assist their research. URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1701142
topic phenomenology
qualitative data analysis software
qualitative research
url http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2688
work_keys_str_mv AT briankellehersohn phenomenologyandqualitativedataanalysissoftwareqdasacarefulreconciliation
_version_ 1725241985399259136