Lab Wiki

> Qualitative Analysis

References

The annotated, citation-verified reference library for this module. · 6 min

Every (Author, Year) link in this module points here. Each entry has its APA-7 reference, a DOI or stable publisher link, and a one-line note on when to cite it. The list is alphabetical by author.

  1. American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33–40.

    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035006033

    The AERA reporting standards. Cite for reporting expectations in education research.

  2. Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14.

    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1

    Influential framing of DBR's warrants. Cite for DBR's evidentiary claims.

  3. Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1998). Contextual design: Defining customer-centered systems. Morgan Kaufmann.

    https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/37625315 · book

    Source of contextual inquiry and affinity diagramming (the KJ-method lineage). Cite for affinity diagramming/contextual design.

  4. Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870

    Critical, practical treatment of member checking. Cite when designing respondent validation.

  5. Blandford, A., Furniss, D., & Makri, S. (2016). Qualitative HCI research: Going behind the scenes. Morgan & Claypool.

    https://doi.org/10.2200/S00706ED1V01Y201602HCI034 · book

    A practical synthesis of qualitative methods for HCI. Cite as an HCI-specific methods primer.

  6. Blumer, H. (1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19(1), 3–10.

    https://doi.org/10.2307/2088165

    Origin of "sensitizing concepts." Cite when using loosely-defined theoretical concepts as analytic starting points.

  7. Brandt, A. M. (1978). Racism and research: The case of the Tuskegee syphilis study. The Hastings Center Report, 8(6), 21–29.

    https://doi.org/10.2307/3561468

    The definitive scholarly account of the Tuskegee study and its ethical failures. Cite when invoking Tuskegee as motivation for human-subjects protections.

  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

    The field-defining six-phase thematic analysis paper. The default citation for any thematic analysis.

  9. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

    Introduces "reflexive TA" and distinguishes it from coding-reliability TA. Cite to specify the reflexive variant.

  10. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

    Quality criteria for reflexive TA and a critique of misapplications. Cite when defending TA quality.

  11. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 13(2), 201–216.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846

    The reflexive-TA critique of saturation. Cite when rejecting saturation logic in interpretivist work.

  12. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/thematic-analysis/book248481 · book

    The definitive practical manual for reflexive TA. Cite for step-by-step procedure.

  13. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.

    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2

    Founding paper of design experiments. Cite for the origins of design-based research (DBR).

  14. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/constructing-grounded-theory/book235960 · book

    The constructivist reframing of grounded theory. Cite when foregrounding co-construction and researcher reflexivity.

  15. Cicchetti, D. V., & Feinstein, A. R. (1990). High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43(6), 551–558.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(90)90159-M

    The companion "resolution" paper. Cite for the recommended positive/negative agreement diagnostics.

  16. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. Jossey-Bass.

    https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Narrative+Inquiry%3A+Experience+and+Story+in+Qualitative+Research-p-9780787972769 · book

    Founding text of narrative inquiry. Cite for experience-centered, story-based research.

  17. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104

    The original Cohen's kappa. Cite for chance-corrected agreement between two coders on nominal categories.

  18. Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70(4), 213–220.

    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026256

    Weighted kappa. Cite when disagreements differ in severity (ordered categories).

  19. Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.

    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_2

    Methodological elaboration of design research. Cite for DBR methodology.

  20. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/basics-of-qualitative-research/book235578 · book

    The systematic/procedural strand of grounded theory (open/axial/selective coding). Cite for structured coding paradigms.

  21. Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80–88.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186

    Denzin's updated statement on triangulation. Cite for the concept's contemporary meaning.

  22. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.

    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005

    The agenda-setting statement of DBR. Cite to define DBR.

  23. Dourish, P. (2006). Implications for design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06) (pp. 541–550). ACM.

    https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124855

    The classic critique of "implications for design" as the metric for ethnography in HCI. Cite on the value of ethnographic/theoretical contributions.

  24. Feinstein, A. R., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1990). High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43(6), 543–549.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-L

    Defines the kappa paradox. Cite to explain why kappa can be low despite high observed agreement.

  25. Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 378–382.

    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619

    Fleiss' kappa. Cite for 3+ raters where raters are not fixed across items.

  26. Furniss, D., Blandford, A., & Curzon, P. (2011). Confessions from a grounded theory PhD: Experiences and lessons learnt. In Proceedings of CHI 2011 (pp. 113–122). ACM.

    https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978960

    A candid account of doing grounded theory in HCI. Cite for practical GTM guidance.

  27. Gale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., & Redwood, S. (2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, 117.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117

    The widely-cited modern operationalization of Framework analysis. Cite for a team-based, stepwise procedure.

  28. Gaver, W. (2012). What should we expect from research through design? In Proceedings of CHI '12 (pp. 937–946). ACM.

    https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208538

    Influential argument on RtD's epistemology and rigor. Cite for RtD evaluation.

  29. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine. (Routledge reprint, 2017)

    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206 · book

    The founding statement of grounded theory and constant comparison. DOI applies to the Routledge reprint. Cite for the origins of inductive theory-building.

  30. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

    The most-cited empirical study of saturation; found saturation within the first twelve interviews. Cite for sample-size justification.

  31. Gwet, K. L. (2008). Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61(1), 29–48.

    https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006X126600

    Introduces the AC1/AC2 statistics that resist the prevalence/paradox problem. Cite when prevalence is skewed.

  32. Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8(1), 23–34.

    https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023

    A hands-on tutorial (with SPSS/R) for choosing and computing kappa and ICC. Cite for practical computation.

  33. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77–89.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664

    The accessible standard reference for Krippendorff's alpha (any measurement level, ≥2 coders, missing data). Cite when you need one flexible coefficient.

  34. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

    Distinguishes conventional (inductive), directed (deductive), and summative content analysis. Cite to position your content-analysis approach.

  35. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.

    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2

    The foundational method for analyzing video records of interaction in the learning sciences. Cite for video/interaction analysis.

  36. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012

    The practical decision guide for the 10 ICC forms and interpretation bands. Cite for ICC selection and reporting.

  37. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/content-analysis/book258450 · book

    The standard content-analysis methodology and home of Krippendorff's alpha. Cite for systematic content analysis.

  38. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.

    https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465

    Foundational culturally relevant framing. Cite for culturally relevant/responsive methodology in education.

  39. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.

    https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

    Source of the widely-used magnitude bands (Slight/Fair/Moderate/Substantial/Almost Perfect). Cite when interpreting kappa/alpha — but note the thresholds are explicitly arbitrary heuristics.

  40. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/naturalistic-inquiry/book842 · book

    Origin of the trustworthiness framework (credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability). Cite when justifying rigor criteria as an alternative to validity/reliability.

  41. Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444

    Proposes "information power" as an alternative to saturation. Cite for a more defensible sample-size rationale.

  42. McDonald, N., Schoenebeck, S., & Forte, A. (2019). Reliability and inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: Norms and guidelines for CSCW and HCI practice. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW), Article 72, 1–23.

    https://doi.org/10.1145/3359174

    The definitive HCI/CSCW treatment of whether and when to use IRR; a meta-analysis finding IRR in ~1/9 of qualitative papers. Cite for reliability norms in HCI.

  43. McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 30–46.

    https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30

    Extends and clarifies ICC inference. Cite alongside Shrout & Fleiss for ICC selection. (Correction in Psychological Methods, 1(4), 390.)

  44. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

    https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Qualitative+Research%3A+A+Guide+to+Design+and+Implementation%2C+4th+Edition-p-9781119003618 · book

    Education-friendly case study and general qualitative design. Cite in education contexts.

  45. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-data-analysis/book246128 · book

    The standard sourcebook for displays, matrices, and within-/cross-case analysis. Cite for systematic data management and visualization.

  46. Muller, M. (2014). Curiosity, creativity, and surprise as analytic tools: Grounded theory method. In J. S. Olson & W. A. Kellogg (Eds.), Ways of knowing in HCI (pp. 25–48). Springer.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0378-8_2 · book

    Grounded theory adapted for HCI. Cite for GTM in HCI.

  47. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

    https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/ · report

    The foundational U.S. statement of research ethics — respect for persons, beneficence, justice. Cite for the principles underlying IRB review.

  48. O'Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220

    Reviews the arguments for/against intercoder reliability and gives practical guidelines. Cite to decide whether ICR fits your study.

  49. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-research-evaluation-methods/book232962 · book

    Comprehensive reference on purposeful sampling and evaluation-oriented design. Cite for sampling logic and applied contexts.

  50. Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/narrative-methods-for-the-human-sciences/book226139 · book

    Thematic, structural, and dialogic/performance narrative analysis. Cite for narrative analytic techniques.

  51. Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing qualitative data (pp. 173–194). Routledge.

    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203413081 · book

    Origin of Framework analysis. DOI applies to the edited volume. Cite for the matrix-based framework approach.

  52. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/the-coding-manual-for-qualitative-researchers/book273583 · book

    The reference catalogue of first- and second-cycle coding methods. Cite to name and justify a specific coding technique.

  53. Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

    Clarifies competing meanings of saturation. Cite to specify which saturation you mean.

  54. Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding. Public Opinion Quarterly, 19(3), 321–325.

    https://doi.org/10.1086/266577

    Scott's pi. Cite as the predecessor to kappa using a joint (rather than individual) chance distribution.

  55. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–428.

    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420

    The foundational ICC typology (six forms). Cite to choose an ICC model.

  56. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2022). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research (2nd ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/interpretative-phenomenological-analysis/book250130 · book

    The authoritative IPA manual. Cite for idiographic, experiential phenomenology.

  57. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/the-art-of-case-study-research/book4954 · book

    Interpretive/intrinsic case study. Cite for holistic, naturalistic case work.

  58. Tavory, I., & Timmermans, S. (2014). Abductive analysis: Theorizing qualitative research. University of Chicago Press.

    https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/A/bo18785878.html · book

    Book-length treatment of abductive analysis. Cite for the full methodology.

  59. Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748

    The canonical statement of the "general inductive approach." Cite for a pragmatic inductive coding workflow.

  60. Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914

    The seminal argument that abduction, not pure induction, drives theory construction. Cite to justify an abductive stance.

  61. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.

    https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/case-study-research-and-applications/book250150 · book

    The post-positivist case-study design tradition. Cite for propositions, multiple-case logic, and rigor.

  62. Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., & Evenson, S. (2007). Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In Proceedings of CHI '07 (pp. 493–502). ACM.

    https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704

    Established research through design (RtD) in HCI. Cite to frame design as inquiry.