@article{doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa, author = {Braun, Virginia and Clarke, Victoria}, title = {Using thematic analysis in psychology}, journal = {Qualitative Research in Psychology}, volume = {3}, number = {2}, pages = {77-101}, year = {2006}, doi = {10.1191/1478088706qp063oa}, URL = {\url{http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa}}, eprint = {url\{http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa}}, abstract = {Thematic analysis is a poorly demarcated, rarely acknowledged, yet widely used qualitative analytic method within psychology. In this paper, we argue that it offers an accessible and theoretically flexible approach to analysing qualitative data. We outline what thematic analysis is, locating it in relation to other qualitative analytic methods that search for themes or patterns, and in relation to different epistemological and ontological positions. We then provide clear guidelines to those wanting to start thematic analysis, or conduct it in a more deliberate and rigorous way, and consider potential pitfalls in conducting thematic analysis. Finally, we outline the disadvantages and advantages of thematic analysis. We conclude by advocating thematic analysis as a useful and flexible method for qualitative research in and beyond psychology.}, annote={} } @misc{notsecret, author={Victoria Bellottti and James Bertrand}, title={The (not-so) secret weapon: Just-in-time wisdom with ethnography, PARC forum}, howpublished={}}%\url={www.parc.com/event/1179/not-so-secret-weapon.html}}} %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% @article {springerlink:10.1007/s10882-005-3688-1, author = {Burstein, Karen and Bryan, Tanis and Chao, Pen-Chiang}, affiliation = {Southwest Institute for Families and Children with Special Needs Scottsdale Arizona}, title = {Promoting Self-Determination Skills Among Youth with Special Health Needs Using Participatory Action Research}, journal = {Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities}, publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, issn = {1056-263X}, keyword = {Behavioral Science}, pages = {185-201}, volume = {17}, issue = {2}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10882-005-3688-1}, note = {10.1007/s10882-005-3688-1}, abstract = {A team of 20 high school and college students with physical and/or health and orthopedic impairments was engaged in participatory action research (PAR) to systematically test strategies to solve problems they confronted in their daily lives. PAR goals were set by the participating youth with special health needs (YSHN) who were involved in every step of the research process from problem identification to dissemination of results. In the study reported here, all participants made progress in analyzing their personal needs, selecting a goal, and implementing a strategy to achieve the goal. In addition, the YSHN identified a common goal of visiting public venues, such as shopping malls, and conducted PAR projects to assess the accessibility of such venues. The results indicate that PAR is a viable method for involving YSHN with varied skills, limitations, and experiences to address personal issues as well as barriers they all confront. PAR appears to be a promising methodology for assisting YSHN in their quest for self-determination and the IDEA (1997) mandate to include adolescents in decision making.}, year = {2005}, annote={This was recommended by Professor Grenier as a source on participatory action research (a methodology, but also called a method).\\ There is a difference between participatory action research and the participant observer role. Participatory action research not only has researchers taking part in activities, which is enough for participant observer, but it is also the case, due to action'', that the activity in which the participation occurs is not just as activity that is part of a culture getting described. The activity is intended to foster change. In this case, the activity is tried and its feasibility and helpfulness assessed. It is the case with CSE2102 that we are trying to effect change, namely create a course designed to suit needs (societal need for more computer discipline -trained people, plus job security needs of students). Most if not all of the students enrolled in CSE2102 are not thinking of themselves as researchers in this activity. Also, the thing that is being changed is not considered to be an infliction of a wrong by a power, so the question, is it participatory action research remains. Creswell2012 p. 582 makes clear that participatory action research conttributes to emancipation or change in society, so it does not seem to apply to CSE2102 innovation.} } @article{doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oabc, author = {Braun, Virginia and Clarke, Victoria}, title = {Using thematic analysis in psychology}, journal = {Qualitative Research in Psychology}, volume = {3}, number = {2}, pages = {77-101}, year = {2006}, doi = {10.1191/1478088706qp063oa}, URL = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa}, eprint = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa}, annote = {pitfalls\\ 1. fail to analyze, make analytic points about the data\\ 2. use the data collection questions as the themes\\ 3. weak or unconvincing analysis--not rich description, interpretation\\ failure to provide adequate examples, e.g., only 1 or 2\\ analysis is deliberate an self-consiously artful creation by the researcher, and must be constructed to persuade the reader of the plausibility of an argument\\ 4. mismatch between data and analytic claims\\ 5. mismatch between theory and analytic claims, research question and form of thematic analysis, interpretation has to be consistent with theoretical framework\\ There are criteria for assessing qualitative research, and they are not uncontroversial\\ rigor: be systematic, with a method that makes sense with the way of conceptualizing the data\\ \begin{tabular}{|p{1cm}|l|p{5cm}|}\hline Process & No. & Criteria\\ hline Transcription & 1 & the data have been transcribed to an appropriate level of detail, and the transcripts have been checked against the source for accuracy\\ Coding & 2 & Each data item has been given equal attention\\ & 3 & Themes have not been generate from a few vivid examples (anecdotal)\\ & 4 & All relevant extracts for each theme have been collated\\ & 5 & Themes have been checked against each other and back to the original data set\\ & 6 & Themes are interally coherent, consistent, and distinctive\\ Analysis & 7 & Data have been analyzed-interpreet-made senso of-rather than just paraphrased or described\\ & 8 &Analysis and data match each other - the extracts illustrate the analytic claims\\ & 9& Analysis tells a convincing and well-organized sotry about the data and topic\\ & 10 & A good balance between analytic anrrative and illustrative extracts is provided\\ Overall & 11 & Enough time has been allocated to complete all phases of the analysis adquately without rushing a phase or giving it a once-voer-lightly\\ Written report & 12 & The assumtions about, and specific appraoch to, thematic analysis are clearly explicated\\ & 13 & There is a good fit between what you cleaim you do, and what you show you have done -- i.e., described method and reported analysis are consistent.\\ & 14 & The language an concepts used in the report are consistent with the epistemological postion of the analysis\\ & 15 & the researcher is positioned as active in the research process themes do not just emerge.\\ \end{tabular}}}