Maximising transparency in a doctoral thesis: The complexities of writing about the use of QSR*NVIVO within a grounded theory study

Abstract

This paper discusses the challenges of how to provide a transparent account of the use of the software programme QSR*NVIVO (QSR 2000) within a Grounded Theory framework (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Strauss and Corbin 1998). Psychology students are increasingly pursuing qualitative research projects such to the extent that the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) advise that students should have skill in the use of computer assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) (Economic and Social Research Council 2001). Unlike quantitative studies, rigid formulae do not exist for writing-up qualitative projects for doctoral theses. Most authors, however, agree that transparency is essential when communicating the findings of qualitative research. Sparkes (2001) recommends that evaluative criteria for qualitative research should be commensurable with the aims, objectives, and epistemological assumptions of the research project. Likewise, the use of CAQDAS should vary according to the research methodology followed, and thus researchers should include a discussion of how CAQDAS was used. This paper describes how the evolving process of coding data, writing memos, categorising, and theorising were integrated into the written thesis. The structure of the written document is described including considerations about restructuring and the difficulties of writing about an iterative process within a linear document.