3.8 Article

Conducting a Qualitative Document Analysis

Journal

QUALITATIVE REPORT
Volume 27, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIV
DOI: 10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044

Keywords

document analysis; qualitative inquiry; reflexive thematic analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Document analysis is an underused approach in qualitative research but holds great value. It allows researchers to study pre-existing texts, overcoming limitations of field research and technology use. The literature on document analysis is scarce, and this paper aims to bridge the gap by discussing its advantages, limitations, and offering strategies and examples.
Document analysis has been an underused approach to qualitative research. This approach can be valuable for various reasons. When used to analyze pre-existing texts, this method allows researchers to conduct studies they might otherwise not be able to complete. Some researchers may not have the resources or time needed to do field research. Although videoconferencing technology and other types of software can be used to reduce some of the obstacles qualitative researchers sometimes encounter, these tools are associated with various problems. Participants might be unskillful in using technology or may not be able to afford it. Conducting a document analysis can also reduce some of the ethical concerns associated with other qualitative methods. Since document analysis is a valuable research method, one would expect to find a wide variety of literature on this topic. Unfortunately, the literature on documentary research is scant. This paper is designed to close the gap in the literature on conducting a qualitative document analysis by focusing on the advantages and limitations of using documents as a source of data and providing strategies for selecting documents. It also offers reasons for using reflexive thematic analysis and includes a hypothetical example of how a researcher might conduct a document analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available