Are we listening to every word? Using multiple analytic methods to examine qualitative data

Abstract

Psychological researchers are increasingly striving to enhance methodological integrity, including in qualitative methods. Although computerized text analysis tools originally emerged as a potential replacement for manual coding approaches, recent studies have underscored the unique yet complementary value of employing several methods. The current study applies two text analysis methods across one qualitative dataset to explore whether each method yields information not clearly evidenced by the other, nor through traditional thematic analysis. Interviews exploring the experiences of paraprofessionals delivering Brief Psychological Interventions (BPIs) were analyzed through Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) and the Meaning Extraction Method (MEM). Results revealed LIWC, MEM, and thematic analysis to be complementary in nature, each providing unique insights that could be missed by implementing any one method alone. Moreover, text analyses can serve as a form of validation for more traditional qualitative approaches while also revealing otherwise indiscernible relationships and patterns within texts.