Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981120101230.0070fbfc@postoffice.sas.upenn.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 10:12:30 -0500
To: MedSoc@csf.colorado.edu, MEDICAL SOCIOLOGY   <MedSoc@csf.colorado.edu>
From: Sita Reddy <sreddy0@sas.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Qualitative Software
In-Reply-To: <3652FAB4.2FE9E739@ssc.upenn.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Ginny!

I didn't respond earlier since I am not too familiar with new versions of
QDA packages. But since you mention Ethnograph and word processing, here's
my two cents:

On the one hand, Ethnograph might certainly help in managing a sample your
size. Particularly if you are looking for simple code,retrieve and sort
features. I think it is easier to use than NUD*IST in terms of coding and
importing new data (bear in mind I am talking of NUDIST rev3).  And it
avoids what critics of NUDIST call "clunking" .. or the inability to
analyze separately pieces of data that have been coded as chunks. It does
not index categories using structured hierarchical trees ... but indexing
features may not be what you are looking for anyway.  

On the other hand, as Phil Brown reminded me, there isn't much by way of
sorting that you cannot do with Word!  When used well, it allows for subtle
coding, quite elaborate searches, good sorting capability etc.  Using Word
(or similar wordprocessing program) alone with your large sample size might
prove a bit unwieldy.  But that might be a tradeoff for the straightforward
access to the data and the close interactions it allows.

I myself found Ethnograph helpful in reworking my master's paper (which you
may/may not remember from ages ago), but that was for a much smaller sample
of 30 physicians.  Since then, however, my work has relied on observational
data in clinics as well as on unstructured interview responses ... and I
now find that using Ethnograph is no more efficient (and far less personal)
than getting familiar "manually" with the data.

And yes, as other listmembers note, of course all data processing devices,
even wordprocessing programs, structure and "enhance" data or drive
research strategies.  But I agree with David Bott .. so does the writing
and transcribing of notes, or the reading of those transcriptions. To say
nothing about the act of observation itself.  
The question is to understand how 'structure' affects the analytical
process. Following the reflexive turn in ethnography, perhaps we could
start with how we 'position' ourselves vis-a-vis our data ... whether these
are qualitative or quantitative.

-- Sita  


________________________

Sita Reddy
55A Charlesfield Street
Providence, RI 02906

Phone: (401)454-8162
sreddy0@sas.upenn.edu