Cited by 38Computational and Text Analysis MethodsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

A qualitative analysis framework using natural language processing and graph theory

Open access
Tierney, Patrick·2012·The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning

Abstract

This paper introduces a method of extending natural language-based processing of qualitative data analysis with the use of a very quantitative tool—graph theory. It is not an attempt to convert qualitative research to a positivist approach with a mathematical black box, nor is it a “graphical solution”. Rather, it is a method to help qualitative researchers, especially those with limited experience, to discover and tease out what lies within the data. A quick review of coding is followed by basic explanations of natural language processing, artificial intelligence, and graph theory to help with understanding the method. The process described herein is limited by neither the size of the data set nor the domain in which it is applied. It has the potential to substantially reduce the amount of time required to analyze qualitative data and to assist in the discovery of themes that might not have otherwise been detected.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.19173/irrodl.v13i5.1240

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Natural language processing provided a means to diagnose the problem and make a recommendation by simplifying and accelerating the discovery of what lies within the data.

    “Natural language processing (NLP) provided a means to diagnose the problem and make a recommendation by simplifying and accelerating the discovery of what lies within the data [22].”

    From A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020 (2021) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Abstract (page not available) says the NLP-and-graph-theory method can help researchers discover what lies within qualitative data and potentially reduce analysis time. Categories Developed From Study Data (page not available) reports recommendations drawn from the resulting themes. The paper does not describe NLP itself as diagnosing a problem, and it attributes theme discovery to a combined method rather than NLP alone. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Balakrishnan, V. K. (1997). Schaum's outline of theories and problems of graph theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  2. Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Quantitative and qualitative approaches (6 th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
  3. Tierney, P. (2011). Exploring the use of distance education technologies for lifestyle change (Unpublished master's thesis). Athabasca University, Athabasca, AB. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10791/12

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tierney, P.
Affiliations
Brock University (CA)
Corresponding author
Tierney, Patrick
Venue
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
Published
2012-11-08
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
173
ISSN
1492-3831 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1485627804
Cited by
38
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4
FWCI
14.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Érudit (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
qualitative data analysis, natural language processing, graph theory, coding, artificial intelligence, text analysis, research methodology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review