Agency and Amplification: A Comparison of Manual and Computational Thematic Analyses by Public Health Researchers
Computational techniques offer a means to overcome the amplified complexity and resource-intensity of qualitative research on online communities. However, we lack an understanding of how these techniques are integrated by researchers in practice, and how to address concerns about researcher agency i...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction 2023-01, Vol.7 (GROUP), p.1-22, Article 2 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 22 |
---|---|
container_issue | GROUP |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction |
container_volume | 7 |
creator | Gauthier, Robert P. Pelletier, Catherine Carrier, Laurie-Ann Dionne, Maude Dubé, Ève Meyer, Samantha Wallace, James R. |
description | Computational techniques offer a means to overcome the amplified complexity and resource-intensity of qualitative research on online communities. However, we lack an understanding of how these techniques are integrated by researchers in practice, and how to address concerns about researcher agency in the qualitative research process. To explore this gap, we deployed the Computational Thematic Analysis Toolkit to a team of public health researchers, and compared their analysis to a team working with traditional tools and methods. Each team independently conducted a thematic analysis of a corpus of comments from Canadian news sites to understand discourses around vaccine hesitancy. We then compared the analyses to investigate how computational techniques may have influenced their research process and outcomes. We found that the toolkit provided access to advanced computational techniques for researchers without programming expertise, facilitated their interaction and interpretation of the data, but also found that it influenced how they approached their thematic analysis. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1145/3567552 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>acm_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1145_3567552</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3567552</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a121t-dbb81ee0d794bdaa6e20a46ab08ccfae97e1788f461148671e3a5e5b4c37799e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNj71LA0EUxBdRMMRgK1bprE7f2-8tj-AXBNLE-ni791ZOcpdwmyb_vZFEsZqB-THMCHGL8IiozZMy1hkjL8REGqcqQC0v__lrMSvlCwDQGzBBTsRd_clDOsxpaOd1v9t0uUu077bDjbjKtCk8O-tUfLw8rxdv1XL1-r6olxWhxH3VxuiRGVoXdGyJLEsgbSmCTykTB8fovM_aHvd565AVGTZRJ-VcCKym4uHUm8ZtKSPnZjd2PY2HBqH5-dScPx3J-xNJqf-DfsNvQb1EUA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Agency and Amplification: A Comparison of Manual and Computational Thematic Analyses by Public Health Researchers</title><source>ACM Digital Library Complete</source><creator>Gauthier, Robert P. ; Pelletier, Catherine ; Carrier, Laurie-Ann ; Dionne, Maude ; Dubé, Ève ; Meyer, Samantha ; Wallace, James R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Robert P. ; Pelletier, Catherine ; Carrier, Laurie-Ann ; Dionne, Maude ; Dubé, Ève ; Meyer, Samantha ; Wallace, James R.</creatorcontrib><description>Computational techniques offer a means to overcome the amplified complexity and resource-intensity of qualitative research on online communities. However, we lack an understanding of how these techniques are integrated by researchers in practice, and how to address concerns about researcher agency in the qualitative research process. To explore this gap, we deployed the Computational Thematic Analysis Toolkit to a team of public health researchers, and compared their analysis to a team working with traditional tools and methods. Each team independently conducted a thematic analysis of a corpus of comments from Canadian news sites to understand discourses around vaccine hesitancy. We then compared the analyses to investigate how computational techniques may have influenced their research process and outcomes. We found that the toolkit provided access to advanced computational techniques for researchers without programming expertise, facilitated their interaction and interpretation of the data, but also found that it influenced how they approached their thematic analysis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2573-0142</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2573-0142</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1145/3567552</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY, USA: ACM</publisher><subject>Collaborative and social computing ; Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms ; Computing methodologies ; Empirical studies in HCI ; Human computer interaction (HCI) ; Human-centered computing</subject><ispartof>Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 2023-01, Vol.7 (GROUP), p.1-22, Article 2</ispartof><rights>ACM</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a121t-dbb81ee0d794bdaa6e20a46ab08ccfae97e1788f461148671e3a5e5b4c37799e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5162-0256 ; 0000-0003-4882-8870 ; 0000-0003-3323-4244 ; 0000-0003-4989-1556 ; 0000-0003-1336-1510 ; 0000-0002-2098-2828 ; 0000-0002-5672-1179</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3567552$$EPDF$$P50$$Gacm$$H</linktopdf><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,2280,27922,27923,40194,75998</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Robert P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pelletier, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrier, Laurie-Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dionne, Maude</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dubé, Ève</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Samantha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallace, James R.</creatorcontrib><title>Agency and Amplification: A Comparison of Manual and Computational Thematic Analyses by Public Health Researchers</title><title>Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction</title><addtitle>ACM PACMHCI</addtitle><description>Computational techniques offer a means to overcome the amplified complexity and resource-intensity of qualitative research on online communities. However, we lack an understanding of how these techniques are integrated by researchers in practice, and how to address concerns about researcher agency in the qualitative research process. To explore this gap, we deployed the Computational Thematic Analysis Toolkit to a team of public health researchers, and compared their analysis to a team working with traditional tools and methods. Each team independently conducted a thematic analysis of a corpus of comments from Canadian news sites to understand discourses around vaccine hesitancy. We then compared the analyses to investigate how computational techniques may have influenced their research process and outcomes. We found that the toolkit provided access to advanced computational techniques for researchers without programming expertise, facilitated their interaction and interpretation of the data, but also found that it influenced how they approached their thematic analysis.</description><subject>Collaborative and social computing</subject><subject>Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms</subject><subject>Computing methodologies</subject><subject>Empirical studies in HCI</subject><subject>Human computer interaction (HCI)</subject><subject>Human-centered computing</subject><issn>2573-0142</issn><issn>2573-0142</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNj71LA0EUxBdRMMRgK1bprE7f2-8tj-AXBNLE-ni791ZOcpdwmyb_vZFEsZqB-THMCHGL8IiozZMy1hkjL8REGqcqQC0v__lrMSvlCwDQGzBBTsRd_clDOsxpaOd1v9t0uUu077bDjbjKtCk8O-tUfLw8rxdv1XL1-r6olxWhxH3VxuiRGVoXdGyJLEsgbSmCTykTB8fovM_aHvd565AVGTZRJ-VcCKym4uHUm8ZtKSPnZjd2PY2HBqH5-dScPx3J-xNJqf-DfsNvQb1EUA</recordid><startdate>20230101</startdate><enddate>20230101</enddate><creator>Gauthier, Robert P.</creator><creator>Pelletier, Catherine</creator><creator>Carrier, Laurie-Ann</creator><creator>Dionne, Maude</creator><creator>Dubé, Ève</creator><creator>Meyer, Samantha</creator><creator>Wallace, James R.</creator><general>ACM</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5162-0256</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4882-8870</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3323-4244</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4989-1556</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1336-1510</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2098-2828</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5672-1179</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230101</creationdate><title>Agency and Amplification</title><author>Gauthier, Robert P. ; Pelletier, Catherine ; Carrier, Laurie-Ann ; Dionne, Maude ; Dubé, Ève ; Meyer, Samantha ; Wallace, James R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a121t-dbb81ee0d794bdaa6e20a46ab08ccfae97e1788f461148671e3a5e5b4c37799e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Collaborative and social computing</topic><topic>Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms</topic><topic>Computing methodologies</topic><topic>Empirical studies in HCI</topic><topic>Human computer interaction (HCI)</topic><topic>Human-centered computing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Robert P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pelletier, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrier, Laurie-Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dionne, Maude</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dubé, Ève</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Samantha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallace, James R.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gauthier, Robert P.</au><au>Pelletier, Catherine</au><au>Carrier, Laurie-Ann</au><au>Dionne, Maude</au><au>Dubé, Ève</au><au>Meyer, Samantha</au><au>Wallace, James R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Agency and Amplification: A Comparison of Manual and Computational Thematic Analyses by Public Health Researchers</atitle><jtitle>Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction</jtitle><stitle>ACM PACMHCI</stitle><date>2023-01-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>GROUP</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>22</epage><pages>1-22</pages><artnum>2</artnum><issn>2573-0142</issn><eissn>2573-0142</eissn><abstract>Computational techniques offer a means to overcome the amplified complexity and resource-intensity of qualitative research on online communities. However, we lack an understanding of how these techniques are integrated by researchers in practice, and how to address concerns about researcher agency in the qualitative research process. To explore this gap, we deployed the Computational Thematic Analysis Toolkit to a team of public health researchers, and compared their analysis to a team working with traditional tools and methods. Each team independently conducted a thematic analysis of a corpus of comments from Canadian news sites to understand discourses around vaccine hesitancy. We then compared the analyses to investigate how computational techniques may have influenced their research process and outcomes. We found that the toolkit provided access to advanced computational techniques for researchers without programming expertise, facilitated their interaction and interpretation of the data, but also found that it influenced how they approached their thematic analysis.</abstract><cop>New York, NY, USA</cop><pub>ACM</pub><doi>10.1145/3567552</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5162-0256</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4882-8870</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3323-4244</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4989-1556</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1336-1510</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2098-2828</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5672-1179</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2573-0142 |
ispartof | Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 2023-01, Vol.7 (GROUP), p.1-22, Article 2 |
issn | 2573-0142 2573-0142 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1145_3567552 |
source | ACM Digital Library Complete |
subjects | Collaborative and social computing Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms Computing methodologies Empirical studies in HCI Human computer interaction (HCI) Human-centered computing |
title | Agency and Amplification: A Comparison of Manual and Computational Thematic Analyses by Public Health Researchers |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T05%3A10%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-acm_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Agency%20and%20Amplification:%20A%20Comparison%20of%20Manual%20and%20Computational%20Thematic%20Analyses%20by%20Public%20Health%20Researchers&rft.jtitle=Proceedings%20of%20the%20ACM%20on%20human-computer%20interaction&rft.au=Gauthier,%20Robert%20P.&rft.date=2023-01-01&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=GROUP&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=22&rft.pages=1-22&rft.artnum=2&rft.issn=2573-0142&rft.eissn=2573-0142&rft_id=info:doi/10.1145/3567552&rft_dat=%3Cacm_cross%3E3567552%3C/acm_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |