This article presents concept mapping as an alternative method to existing code-based and word-based text analysis techniques for one type of qualitative text data—open-ended survey questions. It is argued that the concept mapping method offers a unique blending of the strengths of these approaches while minimizing some of their weaknesses. This method appears to be especially well suited for the type of text generated by open-ended questions as well for organizational research questions that are exploratory in nature, aimed at scale or interview question development, and/or developing conceptual coding schemes. A detailed example of concept mapping on open-ended survey data is presented. Reliability and validity issues associated with concept mapping are also discussed.
References
1.
Afifi, A., & Clark, V. (1996). Computer-aided multivariate analysis (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, LA: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
2.
Axelrod, R. (Ed.). (1976). Structure of decision: The cognitive maps of political elites. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
Boster, J. (1994, June). The successive pile sort. Cultural Anthropology Methods, pp. 11-12.
4.
Carley, K. (1993). Coding choices for textual analysis: A comparison of content analysis and map analysis. In P. Marsden (Ed.), Sociological methodology (Vol. 23, pp. 75-126). Washington, DC: Blackwell for the American Sociological Association.
5.
Carley, K. (1997). Network text analysis: The network position of concepts. In C. Roberts (Ed.), Text analysis for the social sciences: Methods for drawing statistical inference from texts and transcripts (pp. 79-100). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Carley, K., & Kaufer, D. (1993). Semantic connectivity: An approach for analyzing symbols in semantic networks. Communication Theory, 3, 183-213.
7.
Carley, K., & Palmquist, M. (1992). Extracting, representing, and analyzing mental models. Social Forces, 70, 601-636.
8.
Concept-Systems. (1999). The Concept System facilitator training manual. Ithaca, NY: Concept Systems Inc. Available from http://www.conceptsystems.com
9.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Doerfel, M., & Barnett, G. (1999). A semantic network analysis of the international communication association. Human Communication Research, 25, 589-603.
11.
Erickson, P. I., & Kaplan, C. P. (2000). Maximizing qualitative responses about smoking in structured interviews. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 829-840.
12.
Findahl, O., & Hoijer, B. (1981). Media content and human comprehension. In K. Rosengren (Ed.), Advances in content analysis (pp. 111-132). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13.
Fine, G., & Elsbach, K. (2000). Ethnography and experiment in social psychological theory building: Tactics for integrating qualitative field data with quantitative lab data. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 51-76.
14.
Geer, J. G. (1991). Do open-ended questions measure “salient” issues? Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 360-370.
15.
Gerbner, G., Holsti, O., Krippendorff, K., Paisley, W., & Stone, P. (Eds.). (1969). The analysis of communication content: Development in scientific theories and computer techniques. New York: John Wiley.
16.
Guzzo, R., & Shea, G. (1992). Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 269-313). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
17.
Jackson, K., Mannix, E., Peterson, R., & Trochim, W. (2002, June 15-18). A multi-faceted approach to process conflict. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Association for Conflict Management, Salt Lake City, UT.
18.
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.
19.
Kelle, U., & Laurie, H. (1998). Computer use in qualitative research and issues of validity. In U. Kelle (Ed.), Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods, and practice (pp. 19-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
Kraut, A. (Ed.). (1996). Organizational surveys: Tools for assessment and change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
21.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (Vol. 5). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
22.
Kruskal, J., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
23.
Lindkvist, K. (1981). Approaches to textual analysis. In K. Rosengren (Ed.), Advances in content analysis (pp. 23-41). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
24.
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Mohammed, S., Klimoski, R., & Rentsch, J. (2000). The measurement of team mental models: We have no shared schema. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 123-165.
26.
Novak, J. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
Novak, J., & Gowin, D. B. (1997). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29.
Penney, N., & Trochim, W. (2000, November 1-5). Concept mapping data as a guide for developing qualitative interview questions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Honolulu, HI.
30.
Pinkley, R. (1990). Dimensions of conflict frame: Disputant interpretations of conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 117-126.
31.
Pool, I. d. S. (Ed.). (1959). Trends in content analysis. Urbana-Champagne: University of Illinois Press.
32.
Pothas, A.-M., Andries, D., & DeWet, J. (2001). Customer satisfaction: Keeping tabs on the issues that matter. Total Quality Management, 12, 83-94.
33.
Rea, L., & Parker, R. (1997). Designing and conducting survey research: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
Roberts, C. (1997). A theoretical map for selecting among text analysis methods. In C. Roberts (Ed.), Text analysis for the social sciences: Methods for drawing statistical inferences from texts and transcripts (pp. 275-283). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35.
Ryan, G., & Bernard, R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 769-802). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Seidel, J., & Kelle, U. (1995). Different functions of coding in the analysis of textual data. In U. Kelle (Ed.), Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods, and practice (pp. 52-61). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
Shapiro, G. (1997). The future of coders: Human judgments in a world of sophisticated software. In C. Roberts (Ed.), Text analysis for the social sciences: Methods for drawing statistical inferences from texts and transcripts (pp. 225-238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38.
Sproull, N. (1988). Handbook of research methods: A guide for practitioners and students in the social sciences (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
39.
Stone, P. (1997). Thematic text analysis: New agendas for analyzing text content. In C. Robert (Ed.), Text analysis for the social sciences: Methods for drawing statistical inferences from texts and transcripts (pp. 35-54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41.
Trochim, W. (1989). An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 1-16.
42.
Trochim, W. (1993, November 6-11). Reliability of concept mapping. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Dallas, TX.
43.
Weber, R. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
44.
Weller, S., & Romney, A. K. (1988). Systematic data collection (Vol. 10). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
45.
Young, M. (1996). Cognitive mapping meets semantic networks. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 40, 395-414.
