The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Qualitative Analysis Techniques for the Review of the Literature
Open accessAbstract
In this article, we provide a framework for analyzing and interpreting sources that inform a literature review or, as it is more aptly called, a research synthesis. Specifically, using Leech and Onwuegbuzie’s (2007, 2008) frameworks, we delineate how the following four major source types inform research syntheses: talk, observations, drawings/photographs/videos, and documents. We identify 17 qualitative data analysis techniques that are optimal for analyzing one or more of these source types. Further, we outline the role that the following five qualitative data analysis techniques can play in the research synthesis: constant comparison analysis, domain analysis, taxonomic analysis, componential analysis, and theme analysis. We contend that our framework represents a first step in an attempt to help literature reviewers analyze and interpret literature in an optimally rigorous way.
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
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
(1998) · Sage eBooks · Cited by 38,631
Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques.
Ellis, C., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074814 · Cited by 29,249
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques
Long, D. R., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1993) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/328955 · Cited by 17,576
How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1990) · Cited by 14,529
Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists
Strauss, A. L. (1987) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511557842 · Cited by 12,277
(1996) · Cited by 11,584
The Discovery of Grounded Theory
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · The Discovery of Grounded Theory · doi:10.4324/9780203793206-1 · Cited by 8,344
Cited by
Teachers' Perceptions of Technology Integration in Teaching-Learning Practices: A Systematic Review
Akram, H., Abdelrady, A. H., Al-Adwan, A. S., & Ramzan, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.920317 · Cited by 358
The effects of higher education policy on transformation in post-apartheid South Africa
Mzangwa, S. T., & Dede, Y. (2019) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2019.1592737 · Cited by 110
Kang, H., & Chang, B. (2016) · Journal of International Students · doi:10.32674/jis.v6i3.356 · Cited by 70
Inclusive policies and practices in higher education: A systematic literature review
Filippou, K., Acquah, E. O., & Bengs, A. (2025) · Review of Education · doi:10.1002/rev3.70034 · Cited by 73
Aligning theory and methodology in mixed methods research: Before Design Theoretical Placement
Alavi, M., Archibald, M., McMaster, R., Lopez, V., & Cleary, M. (2018) · International Journal of Social Research Methodology · doi:10.1080/13645579.2018.1435016 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Onwuegbuzie, A., Leech, N., & Collins, K.
- Venue
- The Qualitative Report
- Publisher
- Nova Southeastern University
- Published
- 2015-01-20
- ISSN
- 1052-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 2160-3715
- OpenAlex
- W5922892
- Cited by
- 527
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 247.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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 Techniques for the Review of the Literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.46743/2160-3715/2012.1754
- The paper
- Onwuegbuzie, A., Leech, N., & Collins, K. (2015). Qualitative Analysis Techniques for the Review of the Literature. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2012.1754
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.
