2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneb.2006.09.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of a Decision Tree to Determine Appropriateness of NVivo in Analyzing Qualitative Data Sets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
43
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Interrater agreement was determined using the following formula: Percentage Agreement = Agreements/(Agreements + Disagreements). 30 A 70% agreement or higher was considered to be reliable. 31 The average across all 3 focus group discussions was 70.8%; this level was considered reliable.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interrater agreement was determined using the following formula: Percentage Agreement = Agreements/(Agreements + Disagreements). 30 A 70% agreement or higher was considered to be reliable. 31 The average across all 3 focus group discussions was 70.8%; this level was considered reliable.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another category identified was communication failure. The data were then organized and coded using the qualitative data analysis software program NVivo 9 [32]. This approach was chosen in order to highlight how flexibly the formal leader used interpretative repertoires and how they changed their position in the team [33].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For qualitative descriptive research, [15] advice to perform content analysis, where the outcome is a descriptive summary of the data organized in a way that best fits the data. Following the criteria described by [16], the interview data was chosen to be analysed by hand, and presented narratively with identified themes and illustrating quotes. Throughout the paper, the data from the four interviews are referred to in terms of the order they were conducted, i.e.…”
Section: Data Analysis and Presentationmentioning
confidence: 99%