The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.
Qualitative Analysis as a Public Event: The Documentation of Category Development Procedures
Abstract
Although the use of qualitative methods has increased greatly in popularity, many still question the defensibility of the qualitative orientation. It is argued here that questions concerning the credibility and status of qualitative inquiry are related to the privatization of qualitative analysis. The particular area of qualitative analysis I focus on is the process of category development. It is my argument that qualitative researchers must make all aspects of their analysis open to public inspection. In order to achieve this objective, I propose a two-dimensional model designed to facilitate the documentation of procedures used to generate categories. The domain representing the first dimension specifies the various components or actions associated with the development of categories. The second domain addresses the temporal aspects of category development. The intersection of these two analytical domains forms a two-dimensional table that may be used to document the nature of the analytical actions employed in a given study. An empirical example is presented with the intention of illustrating the utility of the approach. The implications of this approach, and some possible criticisms, are considered.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014 · Cited by 11,170
Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis
Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H., & Snelgrove, S. (2016) · Journal of Nursing Education and Practice · doi:10.5430/jnep.v6n5p100 · Cited by 1,994
A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis
Aronson, J. (1995) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/1995.2069 · Cited by 1,758
“Constas (1992) reiterates this point and states that the "interpretative approach should be considered as a distinct point of origination" (p. 258).”
BackgroundQualitative Analysis on Stage: Making the Research Process More Public
Anfara, V. A., Brown, K. M., & Mangione, T. L. (2002) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x031007028 · Cited by 1,362
Beyond the Qualitative Interview: Data Preparation and Transcription
McLellan, E., MacQueen, K. M., & Neidig, J. L. (2003) · Field Methods · doi:10.1177/1525822x02239573 · Cited by 920
Metadata
- Authors
- Constas, M. A.
- Venue
- American Educational Research Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publishing
- Published
- 1992-01-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 253-253
- ISSN
- 0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2053633732
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 34.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Qualitative Analysis as a Public Event: The Documentation of Category Development Procedures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1163368
- The paper
- Constas, M. A. (1992). Qualitative Analysis as a Public Event: The Documentation of Category Development Procedures. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163368
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.