Summary
Contents
Subject index
The wide range of approaches to data analysis in qualitative research can seem daunting even for experienced researchers. This handbook is the first to provide a state-of-the art overview of the whole field of QDA; from general analytic strategies used in qualitative research, to approaches specific to particular types of qualitative data, including talk, text, sounds, images and virtual data.
The handbook includes chapters on traditional analytic strategies such as grounded theory, content analysis, hermeneutics, phenomenology and narrative analysis, as well as coverage of newer trends like mixed methods, reanalysis and meta-analysis. Practical aspects such as sampling, transcription, working collaboratively, writing and implementation are given close attention, as are theory and theorization, reflexivity, and ethics.
Written by a team of experts in qualitative research from around the world, this handbook is an essential compendium for all qualitative researchers and students across the social sciences.
Qualitative Meta-Analysis
Qualitative Meta-Analysis
The number of qualitative research studies on a similar topic within the same field of study is growing. Traditional narrative reviews lack a systematic approach to the evaluation and synthesis of the research studies examining the same phenomenon/a. Several systematic approaches to the review, evaluation, analysis and synthesis of a group of studies investigating the same phenomenon/a have been proposed in recent years. These approaches use different, though in many aspects overlapping or similar, methodologies. They can be known under a variety of labels, such as qualitative meta-analysis, qualitative meta-synthesis, meta-ethnography, grounded formal theory, meta-study or meta-summary (cf. Thorne et al., 2004).
The most frequently used term, for what I refer to in this chapter as qualitative meta-analysis, is qualitative meta-synthesis (cf. Finfgeld, 2003; Jensen and Allen, 1996; Thorne et al., 2004). Authors preferring the term meta-synthesis argue that the meta-analytical procedure is, in the case of qualitative meta-analysis, more interpretive than aggregative (Finfgeld, 2003) and therefore the term synthesis is more appropriate. On the contrary, the argument for use of the term qualitative meta-analysis suggests using this term similarly as it is used in quantitative research (Timulak, 2009). Quantitative meta-analysis also aims at interpretation and inference, yet the activity of ‘analysis’ is stressed in the title.
Qualitative meta-analysis is a secondary analysis (see Wästersfors et al., Chapter 32, this volume) of the primary, original, studies addressing the same research questions. It has two main aims: (1) to provide a concise and comprehensive picture of findings across those studies; and (2) to examine and evaluate the impact of methodological influences in the original studies on their findings (Timulak, 2009). The ultimate goal is, as Schreiber et al. (1997: 314) put it, to review a group of studies ‘for the purposes of discovering the essential elements and translating the results into an end product that transforms the original results into a new conceptualization’ (italics in original). This conceptualization should be, as Finfgeld (2003: 894) suggests, ‘more substantive than those [conceptualizations] resulting from individual investigations’.
Outline of the Developmental and Theoretical Background of the Approach
The idea of qualitative meta-analysis was probably first proposed by Stern and Harris (1985; cf. Schreiber et al., 1997); however, the major impact on the field came from a work on meta-ethnography in education by Noblit and Hare (1988). Currently, there exist a variety of approaches to qualitative meta-analysis. Some, using Ponterotto's classification (2005), have more post-positivistic characteristics and tend rather to summarize findings of the original studies. Others have a more constructivist–interpretive approach and aim at interpreting the original studies and offering an overarching or a particular perspective presenting conceptualization. Therefore, it is important to note that the approach to conducting qualitative meta-analysis may vary across researchers and research teams, and that there is not one consensually agreed upon approach.
The variety and diversity in the approach to qualitative meta-analysis is also reflected in the fact that there exist various ‘brand name’ methods of conducting qualitative meta-analysis. Although it is probably true that each of the brand name approaches brings a unique set of skills and perspectives, which it emphasizes, and sees as defining, two meta-analyses using the same brand name approach may sometimes be more different than two meta-analyses using different brand name approaches.
...
- Loading...
Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL
-
Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life -
Read modern, diverse business cases
-
Explore hundreds of books and reference titles
Read next
More like this
Sage Recommends
We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.
Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches