Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain
Content analysis is a powerful tool for investigating attitudes expressed in naturally occurring language data. It is a useful tool to help researchers develop an understanding of a specific research field through identifying how particular issues or topics have been conceptualized or where fieldwor...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2012-11-01
|
Series: | SAGE Open |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012467788 |
id |
doaj-9199fabe34764b20a0d66852542eb555 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-9199fabe34764b20a0d66852542eb5552020-11-25T03:21:38ZengSAGE PublishingSAGE Open2158-24402012-11-01210.1177/215824401246778810.1177_2158244012467788Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research DomainKylie Fisk0Adrian Cherney1Matthew Hornsey2Andrew Smith3 University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia University of Queensland, St Lucia, AustraliaContent analysis is a powerful tool for investigating attitudes expressed in naturally occurring language data. It is a useful tool to help researchers develop an understanding of a specific research field through identifying how particular issues or topics have been conceptualized or where fieldwork can be limited or prohibitive. This is especially true for research on postconflict reconstruction, where large-scale quantitative surveying or metareviews of the literature can be prohibitive. The present study provides a case study of how a particular content analysis software program—Leximancer—was used to map factors associated with institutional legitimacy in postconflict societies. The case of Timor-Leste is used as an example. We examine texts at three levels of discourse: at the academic, official, and primary levels. Results indicate differing perspectives on legitimacy at each level of discourse. This article offers a snapshot of a potential method for understanding how particular topics are conceptualized within a specific research field and can thus help in the development of evaluation methods or data collection instruments.https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012467788 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Kylie Fisk Adrian Cherney Matthew Hornsey Andrew Smith |
spellingShingle |
Kylie Fisk Adrian Cherney Matthew Hornsey Andrew Smith Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain SAGE Open |
author_facet |
Kylie Fisk Adrian Cherney Matthew Hornsey Andrew Smith |
author_sort |
Kylie Fisk |
title |
Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain |
title_short |
Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain |
title_full |
Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain |
title_fullStr |
Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain |
title_full_unstemmed |
Using Computer-Aided Content Analysis to Map a Research Domain |
title_sort |
using computer-aided content analysis to map a research domain |
publisher |
SAGE Publishing |
series |
SAGE Open |
issn |
2158-2440 |
publishDate |
2012-11-01 |
description |
Content analysis is a powerful tool for investigating attitudes expressed in naturally occurring language data. It is a useful tool to help researchers develop an understanding of a specific research field through identifying how particular issues or topics have been conceptualized or where fieldwork can be limited or prohibitive. This is especially true for research on postconflict reconstruction, where large-scale quantitative surveying or metareviews of the literature can be prohibitive. The present study provides a case study of how a particular content analysis software program—Leximancer—was used to map factors associated with institutional legitimacy in postconflict societies. The case of Timor-Leste is used as an example. We examine texts at three levels of discourse: at the academic, official, and primary levels. Results indicate differing perspectives on legitimacy at each level of discourse. This article offers a snapshot of a potential method for understanding how particular topics are conceptualized within a specific research field and can thus help in the development of evaluation methods or data collection instruments. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012467788 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT kyliefisk usingcomputeraidedcontentanalysistomaparesearchdomain AT adriancherney usingcomputeraidedcontentanalysistomaparesearchdomain AT matthewhornsey usingcomputeraidedcontentanalysistomaparesearchdomain AT andrewsmith usingcomputeraidedcontentanalysistomaparesearchdomain |
_version_ |
1724613529117392896 |