Jump to content


Photo

Handling too many free nodes and organizing them in Tree Nodes


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Asma

Asma

    Casual Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 20 April 2010 - 09:02 AM

Hi,

I am using grounded theory for my doctoral research project. I have started coding my interview transcripts by following formula;

Free Nodes - Open Codes

Tree Nodes - Axial Codes

After having generated 270 free nodes just from first interview transcript, i thought that i should start organizing them in tree nodes side by side, So i did that. I then continued creating free nodes from other transcripts (total 25 transcripts each of about 20 pages), hence i kept on adding to the already existed free nodes list. Some codes were reapplied (e.g., work life balance was talked about by all respondents) whereas many were created anew. When i tired to organize the free nodes in tree nodes, i was completely lost, i couldnt locate how many were already grouped, how many new are to group as NVivo organizes the list alphabetically. Above all the list of free nodes is getting too long to manage! I think that grouping of free nodes into tree nodes should be done side by side so as to see what categories are emerging, and to see whether have i attained theoritical saturation stage or i need to explore certain tcategories and themes further. Am I right?

Please advice on how to manage this situation?


Regards

Asma Rauf
Doctoral Researcher
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Group,
Essex Business School, Southend Campus,
University of Essex, UK
Tel: 0044 778 0870 606
email: arauf@essex.ac.uk
missarauf@gmail.com

#2 alexquse

alexquse

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 21 April 2010 - 12:59 AM

My personal strategy looks like this:

I keep very little free nodes. I quickly organize the nodes in tree.
I code in an iterative process: I code in free node or direct in the structure (tree), then I'll only work on nodes (rearrangement, restructuring), then I go back to the sources to continue coding them, then I reorganize the tree, sometimes I go into the node in order to correct the codes... After a few cycles, I began to write, to build models. And I go back to coding....

The advice I donít follow is to properly code from the beginning. I prefer coding quickly and roughly and refine later. I try to get an overview of the whole corpus as quickly as possible. So I approach the result by progressive approximations.

The advice I follow is that I use a lot the matrix: I'm coding types of actors, actions, moments, etc. .. Then, using the matrix, I can reconstruct the interactions. This avoids generating too much code.

I structure the main axes using logic (deductive method): I distinguish between actions and representations, transgression and repression, etc. ..- all depends on the subject of study. And within these broad themes I use rather an inductive method, grounded theory.

I am always interested to discuss about what happens in the backroom of research. I have no solution, perhaps it is the worst advices I give here...

Alex

#3 Maciej

Maciej

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland, Gdańsk

Posted 21 April 2010 - 04:06 AM

It's great to see different type of coding strategy!

My own:

- basic, opening coding - free nodes and tree nodes (if needed),
- annotation - reading and very precise comment (similar to "line by line strategy"),
- axial coding based on annotation - creating memos for each axis (early version of categories)
- sets for free node and memos depends on subject,
- coding based on sets, another or additional data, like: memos, interviews (audio, video, transcript) and models,

then...

writing, writing, writing.

Best regards,
Maciej.

#4 Asma

Asma

    Casual Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 21 April 2010 - 04:38 AM

Many thanks for so useful comments and sharing your coding strategy.

Alex i tried to work that way, i mean creating axial code (tree nodes) side by side but i wasnt sure if that is the right way. As I am more into inductive coding, working up from data to codes and categories, so wanted to avoid forcing categories on the new codes because i realised that i started trying to fit all new codes into existing categories. but i am giving it another try because its too messy to have a longggggg list of unmanageable free nodes !

@Maciej: your way of working shows you are very well versed with NVivo, i have just started using the software so i am not proficient yet! but i was wondering if you are using the grounded theory or thematic analysis? if yes, how do you group different codes to form categories?


Best Regards
Asma


It's great to see different type of coding strategy!

My own:

- basic, opening coding - free nodes and tree nodes (if needed),
- annotation - reading and very precise comment (similar to "line by line strategy"),
- axial coding based on annotation - creating memos for each axis (early version of categories)
- sets for free node and memos depends on subject,
- coding based on sets, another or additional data, like: memos, interviews (audio, video, transcript) and models,

then...

writing, writing, writing.

Best regards,
Maciej.



#5 alexquse

alexquse

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 21 April 2010 - 07:16 PM

Hi,
Just to clarify:
There is no question of coding by means of a deductive method, but only structuring the existing codes with large categories : action/representation/actors/context, etc... The large categories only put codes in order. Because, from my point of view, it is impossible to do this only with pure inductive method: the actors don’t produce systematic metatheory. When you code, you produce anyway selection and synthesis that changes the grammatical status of the reality.
A. Strauss ought to distinguish a real hospital from a play in a theatre, because interactions, dialogues could be exactly similar. Therefore, we are forced to introduce an external point of view, sometimes...
... But it is true that I am very critical about radical ethnomethodology... and I'm working about play, fiction, lie...

I use very little set, annotations, and links etc... I use Nvivo to do "pure text analysis", and after, I migrate to MS Word. But I'll try to start using a bit more these other utilities. I'll let you know.

Alex

edit at 16h50: memo link to develop meaning of node is a good idea, but is there a way to see the presence of memo link when you code in "detail view right"?

#6 Subhas

Subhas

    Casual Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 31 May 2010 - 10:50 AM

It's great to see different type of coding strategy!

My own:

- basic, opening coding - free nodes and tree nodes (if needed),
- annotation - reading and very precise comment (similar to "line by line strategy"),
- axial coding based on annotation - creating memos for each axis (early version of categories)
- sets for free node and memos depends on subject,
- coding based on sets, another or additional data, like: memos, interviews (audio, video, transcript) and models,

then...

writing, writing, writing.

Best regards,
Maciej.


I have to say I like your strategy better among the others. It seems very simple and straightforward to me. :)

ronald Cruzunusonusonag
p




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users