Difference between revisions of "Paulus-Lester2015"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Trena M. Paulus; Jessica Nina Lester; |Title=ATLAS.ti for conversation and discourse analysis studies |Tag(s)=EMCA; CAQDAS; software; te...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Trena M. Paulus; Jessica Nina Lester; | |Author(s)=Trena M. Paulus; Jessica Nina Lester; | ||
|Title=ATLAS.ti for conversation and discourse analysis studies | |Title=ATLAS.ti for conversation and discourse analysis studies | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; CAQDAS; software; technology; ATLAS.ti; transcription; analysis; conversation analysis; discourse analysis; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; CAQDAS; software; technology; ATLAS.ti; transcription; analysis; conversation analysis; discourse analysis; |
|Key=Paulus-Lester2015 | |Key=Paulus-Lester2015 | ||
|Year=2015 | |Year=2015 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=International Journal of Social Research Methodology | |Journal=International Journal of Social Research Methodology | ||
|Volume=19 | |Volume=19 | ||
|Number=4 | |Number=4 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=1–24 |
| − | |URL= | + | |URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13645579.2015.1021949 |
| − | |Abstract=The use of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) has | + | |DOI=10.1080/13645579.2015.1021949 |
| − | not been without controversy, with a pervasive sense of skepticism and | + | |Abstract=The use of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) has not been without controversy, with a pervasive sense of skepticism and resistance towards its adoption by many scholars. Language-based researchers in particular, such as conversation and discourse analysts, have been slow to embrace such tools for their work. In this paper we illustrate how we have used ATLAS.ti to support our own conversation and discourse analysis work, in order to demonstrate how such a tool can be leveraged to complete nine analytic tasks. Tasks and features we describe include, among others, transcribing and synchronizing transcripts with media files, engaging in unmotivated looking through creating quotations, and conducting a close, line by line analysis through writing memos. We illustrate how ATLAS.ti has allowed us to document our analytic decisions in a transparent, reflexive, rigorous and systematic way. We note, too, limitations of the software such as a lack of real-time collaboration support and challenges inherent to the analysis of video and online interactional data. Rather than taking control away from the researcher, we argue that ATLAS.ti enables the analyst to solve a range of methodological challenges, such as working with large data-sets and supporting deeper levels of analysis than is possible by hand. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | such tools for their work. In this paper we illustrate how we have used ATLAS.ti | ||
| − | to support our own conversation and discourse analysis work, in order to | ||
| − | |||
| − | and features we describe include, among others, transcribing and synchronizing | ||
| − | transcripts with media | ||
| − | quotations, and conducting a close, line by line analysis through writing memos. | ||
| − | We illustrate how ATLAS.ti has allowed us to document our analytic decisions | ||
| − | in a transparent, | ||
| − | of the software such as a lack of real-time collaboration support and challenges | ||
| − | inherent to the analysis of video and online interactional data. Rather than taking | ||
| − | control away from the researcher, we argue that ATLAS.ti enables the analyst to | ||
| − | solve a range of methodological challenges, such as working with large data-sets | ||
| − | and supporting deeper levels of analysis than is possible by hand. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:26, 15 December 2019
| Paulus-Lester2015 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Paulus-Lester2015 |
| Author(s) | Trena M. Paulus, Jessica Nina Lester |
| Title | ATLAS.ti for conversation and discourse analysis studies |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, CAQDAS, software, technology, ATLAS.ti, transcription, analysis, conversation analysis, discourse analysis |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2015 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | International Journal of Social Research Methodology |
| Volume | 19 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 1–24 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/13645579.2015.1021949 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The use of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) has not been without controversy, with a pervasive sense of skepticism and resistance towards its adoption by many scholars. Language-based researchers in particular, such as conversation and discourse analysts, have been slow to embrace such tools for their work. In this paper we illustrate how we have used ATLAS.ti to support our own conversation and discourse analysis work, in order to demonstrate how such a tool can be leveraged to complete nine analytic tasks. Tasks and features we describe include, among others, transcribing and synchronizing transcripts with media files, engaging in unmotivated looking through creating quotations, and conducting a close, line by line analysis through writing memos. We illustrate how ATLAS.ti has allowed us to document our analytic decisions in a transparent, reflexive, rigorous and systematic way. We note, too, limitations of the software such as a lack of real-time collaboration support and challenges inherent to the analysis of video and online interactional data. Rather than taking control away from the researcher, we argue that ATLAS.ti enables the analyst to solve a range of methodological challenges, such as working with large data-sets and supporting deeper levels of analysis than is possible by hand.
Notes
