Qualitative analysis techniques for the review of the literature

Qualitative Report

Volumn 17, Issue 28, 2012, Pages

  Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J ^a   Leech, Nancy L ^b   Collins, Kathleen M T ^c  

^a SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Componential analysis; Constant comparison analysis; Domain analysis; Qualitative analysis; Research synthesis; Review of the literature; Taxonomic analysis; Theme analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870266159     PISSN: 10520147     EISSN: 21603715     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Alton-Lee, A. (1998). A troubleshooter's checklist for prospective authors derived from reviewers' critical feedback. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 887-890.
2. American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33-40.
3. Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3-15. doi:10.3102/0013189X034006003
4. Casagrande, J. B., & Hale, K. L. (1967). Semantic relationships in Papago folk-definitions. In D. Hymes & W. E. Bittle (Eds.), Studies in southwestern ethnolinguistics (pp. 165-196). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
5. Combs, J. P., Bustamante, R. M., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). A mixed methods approach to conducting literature reviews for stress and coping researchers: An interactive literature review process framework. In G. S. Gates, W. H. Gmelch, & M. Wolverton (Series Eds.) & K. M. T. Collins, A. J. Onwuegbuzie, & Q. G. Jiao (Vol. Eds.), Toward a broader understanding of stress and coping: Mixed methods approaches (pp. 213-241). The Research on Stress and Coping in Education Series (Vol. 5). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
6. Dellinger, A., & Leech, N. L. (2007). A validity framework: A unified approach to evaluating validity of empirical research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 309-332. doi:10.1177/1558689807306147
7. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Fink, A. (2009). Conducting research literature reviews: From the Internet to paper. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9. Flick, U. (1998). An introduction to qualitative research: Theory, method and applications. London, UK: Sage.
10. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education with PowerWeb (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
11. Freeman, M., deMarrais, K., Preissle, J., Roulston, K., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: An incitement to discourse. Educational Researcher, 36, 25-32. doi:10.3102/0013189X06298009
12. Frels, R. K. (2010). The experiences and perceptions of selected mentors: An exploratory study of the dyadic relationship in school-based mentoring. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX.
13. Garrard, J. (2009). Health sciences literature review made easy: The matrix method. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
14. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology.
15. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
16. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
17. Glass, G. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3-8. doi:10.3102/0013189X005010003
18. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274. doi:10.3102/01623737011003255
19. Hart, C. (2005). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London, UK: Sage.
20. Herrera, C., Grossman, J. B., Kauh, T. J., Feldman, A. F., & McMaken, J., (2007). Making a difference in schools: The big brothers big sisters school-based mentoring impact study. Public/Private Ventures. Retrieved from http://www.ppv.org/ppv/publications/assets/219_publication.pdf
21. Karcher, M. J., & Herrera, C. (2008). School-based mentoring. Research in Action, 6. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED502227)
22. Leech, N. L. (2004). Types of qualitative and quantitative analyses used by faculty researchers. Unpublished manuscript, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center.
23. Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A., Brannagan, K. B., & Tanaka, H. (2010). Evaluating mixed research studies: A mixed methods approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4, 17-31. doi:10.1177/1558689809345262
24. Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 557-584. doi:10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557
25. Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2008). Qualitative data analysis: A compendium of techniques for school psychology research and beyond. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 587-604. doi:10.1037/1045-3830.23.4.587
26. Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Guidelines for conducting and reporting mixed research in the field of counseling and beyond. Journal of Counseling and Development, 88, 61-69.
27. Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Beyond constant comparison qualitative data analysis: Using Nvivo. School Psychology Quarterly, 26, 70-84. doi:10.1037/a0022711
28. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29. Machi, L. A., & McEvoy, B. T. (2009). The literature review: Six steps to success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
30. Marcus, C., & Fischer, M. (1986). Anthropology on cultural critique. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31. Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 279-299.
32. Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
33. Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
34. Morse, J. M. (1995). The significance of saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 147-149. doi:10.1016/0029-8018(79)90019-2
35. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Collins, K. M. T., Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A. B., & Jiao, Q. G. (2010). A meta-framework for conducting mixed research syntheses for stress and coping researchers and beyond. In G. S. Gates, W. H. Gmelch, & M. Wolverton (Series Eds.) & K. M. T. Collins, A. J. Onwuegbuzie, & Q. G. Jiao (Vol. Eds.), Toward a broader understanding of stress and coping: Mixed methods approaches (pp. 169-211). The Research on Stress and Coping in Education Series (Vol. 5). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
36. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2005). Editorial: Evidence-based guidelines for publishing articles in Research in the Schools and beyond. Research in the Schools, 12(2), 1-11.
37. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2004). Enhancing the interpretation of "significant" findings: The role of mixed methods research. The Qualitative Report, 9, 770-792. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR9-4/onwuegbuzie.pdf
38. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). A typology of errors and myths perpetuated in educational research textbooks. Current Issues in Education [On-line], 8(7). Retrieved from http://cie.ed.asu/volume8/number7
39. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Leech, N. L., & Collins, K. M. T. (2008). Interviewing the interpretive researcher: A method for addressing the crises of representation, legitimation, and praxis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7, 1-17.
40. QSR International Pty Ltd. (2008). NVivo: Version 8. Reference guide. Doncaster, Victoria, Australia: Author.
41. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
42. Ridley, D. (2008). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2003). Creating metasummaries of qualitative findings. Nursing Research, 52, 226-233. doi:10.1097/00006199-200307000-00004
44. Schwandt, T. A. (2007). Sage dictionary of qualitative inquiry (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
46. Spradley, J. P. (1997). The ethnographic interviewer. Cambridge, MA: International Thomson.
47. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.
49. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
50. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
51. Willinsky, J. (2005). Scholarly associations and the economic viability of open access publishing. Open Journal System Demonstration Journal, 1(1), 1-25.