Advertisement

Abductive Thematic Network Analysis (ATNA) Using ATLAS-ti

  • Komalsingh Rambaree
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter introduces Abductive Thematic Network Analysis (ATNA) as a methodological approach for qualitative data analysis. It starts by providing a brief description on abductive theory of method and thematic analysis method. Then, it highlights how the two methods are combined to create ATNA. Using a qualitative data set, this chapter demonstrates the steps in undertaking ATNA with a computer-aided qualitative data analysis software—ATLAS-ti v.7.5. The chapter concludes that ATNA provides to researchers a much-needed pragmatic and logical way of reasoning, organising, and presenting qualitative data analysis.

References

  1. Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic Networks: An Analytic Tool for Qualitative Research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bazeley, P. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  3. Birks, M., Chapman, Y., & Francis, K. (2008). Memoing In Qualitative Research: Probing Data and Processes. Journal of Research in Nursing, 13(1), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987107081254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, G., & Meadows, R. (2016). Conceptualising Social Life. In N. Gilbert & P. Stoneman (Eds.), Researching Social Life (pp. 10–24). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  7. Cupchik, G. (2001). Constructivist Realism: An Ontology that Encompasses Positivist and Constructivist Approaches to the Social Sciences. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1), Article 7. Retrieved February 12, 2011, from http://qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/1-01/1- 01cupchik-e.htm
  8. Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. (2002). Systematic Combining: An Abductive Approach to Case Research. Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 553–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Feilzer, M. Y. (2010). Doing Mixed Methods Research Pragmatically—Implications for the Rediscovery of Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), Article 7. Retrieved February 12, 2011 from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_1/html/fereday.htm
  11. Friese, S. (2013). ATLAS.ti 7 User Guide and Reference: ATLAS.ti. Berlin: Scientific Software Development GmbH. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://atlasti.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/05/atlasti_v7_manual_201312.pdf?q=/uploads/media/atlasti_v7_manual_201312.pdf
  12. Friese, S. (2014). Qualitative DATA analysis with ATLAS.ti (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
  13. Haig, B. D. (2005a). An Abductive Theory of Scientific Method. Psychological Methods, 10, 371–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haig, B. D. (2005b). Exploratory Factor Analysis, Theory Generation, and Scientific Method. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40(3), 303–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haig, B. D. (2008a). Scientific Method, Abduction, and Clinical Reasoning. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64, 1013–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haig, B. D. (2008b). Précis of “An Abductive Theory of Scientific Method”. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64, 1019–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haig, B. D. (2015). Commentary: Exploratory Data Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1), 1247.Google Scholar
  18. Haig, B. D., & Evers, C. W. (2016). Realist Inquiry in Social Science. New York: SAGE.Google Scholar
  19. Hodkinson, P. (2016). Ground Theory and Inductive Research. In N. Gilbert & P. Stoneman (Eds.), Researching Social Life (pp. 98–115). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  20. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Koob, J. J., & Funk, J. (2002). Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory: Issues of Reliability and Validity. Research on Social Work Practice, 12(2), 293–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Levin-Rozalis, M. (2004). Searching for the Unknowable: A Process of Detection—Abductive Research Generated by Projective Techniques. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(2), Article 1. Retrieved February 12, 2011, from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_2/pdf/rozalis.pdf
  23. Lipton, P. (2000). Inference to the Best Explanation. In W. H. Newton-Smith (Ed.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Science (pp. 184–193). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  24. Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 48–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Morse, J. (2011). Molding Qualitative Health Research. Qualitative Health Research, 21(8), 1019–1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paavola, S. (2004). Abduction as a Logic and Methodology of Discovery: The Importance of Strategies. Foundations of Science, 9(3), 267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paavola, S. (2015). Deweyan Approaches to Abduction? In U. Zackariasson (Ed.), Action, Belief and Inquiry—Pragmatist Perspectives on Science, Society and Religion (pp. 230–249). Nordic Studies in Pragmatism 3. Helsinki: Nordic Pragmatism Network.Google Scholar
  28. Rambaree, K., & Faxelid, E. (2013). Considering Abductive Thematic Network Analysis with ATLAS.ti 6.2. In N. Sappleton (Ed.), Advancing Research Methods with New Media Technologies (pp. 170–186). Hershey: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reichertz, J. (2009). Abduction: The Logic of Discovery of Grounded Theory. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(1), Art. 13. Retrieved February 12, 2011, from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1001135
  30. Ryan, G., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to Identify Themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Seal, A. (2016). Thematic Analysis. In N. Gilbert & P. Stoneman (Eds.), Researching Social Life (pp. 444–458). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  32. Taylor, C., & Coffey, A. (2009). Editorial—Special Issue: Qualitative Research and Methodological Innovation. Qualitative Research, 9(5), 523–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thornberg, R. (2012). Informed Grounded Theory. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(3), 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory Construction in Qualitative Research: From Grounded Theory to Abductive Analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H., & Snelgrove, S. (2016). Theme Development in Qualitative Content Analysis and Thematic Analysis. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 6(5), 100–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Komalsingh Rambaree
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GävleGävleSweden

Personalised recommendations