I have been rereading a lot of papers the last 2 weeks that I read, probably in the fall.  I am writing up my results and discussion sections, so have been reviewing papers on grounded theory, and am now kicking myself that I didn’t reread these certain papers before I began my analysis.  Not because they would have changed the way I performed my analysis, as I had already planned out my approach beforehand.  But now that I’m reviewing them again I’m realizing that all of the second guesses I was making and frustrations I was experiencing were normal and part of the process.  It probably would have saved me some time of going over them again and again, and given me some reassurance.  But I commonly do this, make things more complicated than they need to be. *le sigh*

For example, reading this before I tackled the analysis and having it fresh in my mind would have helped alot:

In summary, coding qualitative information into quantitative data is often useful and even necessary, but must be done carefully. It should be  remembered that coding adds neither objectivity nor accuracy to data, although it may appear that way. Coding is especially difficult when the concept to be coded is subjective in nature, when the terminology used to describe it varies and is difficult to interpret, and when different data sources disagree.

(p.565) Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering Carolyn B. Seaman

OR

Collection of qualitative data is often a very satisfying experience for the researcher. Although it is often more labor-intensive, it is also more enjoyable to collect than quantitative data. It is interesting and engaging and it often gives the researcher the sense that they are closer to reality than when dealing with quantitative abstractions. Many researchers wish that their work could end there. The analysis of qualitative data is, in this researcher’s experience, not nearly as inspiring as its collection. It is sometimes boring, often tedious, and always more time-consuming than expected.

(p.565-566) Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering Carolyn B. Seaman

These words hit the nail on the head concerning what I was feeling throughout the analysis process.  Not sure why I felt the need to share on my blog…but it’s just so classic Alecia, to stress out about every detail thinking I’m doing something wrong, go over it again and again, wasting time…and then realize after the fact that I was right from the very beginning…or that the easiest way to reassure myself was at my fingertips and I just didn’t realize it.  f@%#!

Advertisements