Step 1: The Focus BMS-791325 supplement question and Eliciting Responses A first aim in the content analysis of open-ended text narratives is to identify relevant responses (and their response codes) that answer a specific focus question. This methodology, as we have developed it, is a variation of a content analysis approach–an open-ended “topic category” interview that was developed by Flannigan, McGrath, Meyer, and Garcia (1995). Also, an interview protocol that is similar to our focus question interview protocol (our Platica) is the Adult Interview Guide used in the International Resilience Project (Ungar, 2010). From our prior research, we found that the identification of relevant responses (response codes) is facilitated by framing a focus question narrowly, sometimes in the form of a sentence completion, for example, “What does being resilient mean to you?; being resilient means: _______.” Furthermore, regarding the study of a personal attribute such as machismo, we found that two focus questions are needed: (a) asking about the general concept of machismo (machismo beliefs) and (b) asking about the respondent’s own identification with these beliefs (machismo self-identification). Specifically, our Platica interview protocol consists of a series of specific focus questions. For example, to the focus question, “Please tell me what a real `macho’ man is like,” one response was that being macho is, “Someone who probably does not respect the opinions of females … but that to me it is almost a stereotype,” with the relevant response code being, “[ID536] does not respect the opinions of females.” Here, the response, “… but that to me it is almost a stereotype,” is solely a comment, and this would not be coded as a relevant response. As collected via independent in-depth audio-recorded interviews, each participant serves as a “case,” and the “case” (not the response codes) serves as the “unit of analysis.” In response to a given focus question, each participant or case will contribute zero, one, or more verbal responses (Ri), which are then used to create response codes (Cj). As we have developed this methodology, response codes that have functionally equivalent meaning are combined into a thematic category (Fk; see Figure 2). This procedure of identifying and labeling thematic categories is similar to open coding as described by Strauss and Corbin (1990), a procedure that includes discovering categories and category naming (Strauss Corbin, 1990). As an example, from our IMM studies of resilience among Hispanic leaders, community residents, and users of illegal drugs, within our audio-recorded qualitative Platica protocol, we examined machismo beliefs and machismo self-identification. First, we presented an introductory statement, “Within the Latino/Hispanic cultures and in other parts of the world, men are often described as being `manly’ or `macho’ and women are often described as being `feminine’ or `motherly.'” Subsequently, the first focus question was, “Please tell me what a real `macho’ man is like (their traits or characteristics): _________.” An example of a pattern of responses and subsequent interviewer probes is the following:J Mix Methods Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 December 11.Castro et al.PageParticipant: “Machismo is the foundation of NIK333 web family, [a macho] is the heart of the family.” Interviewer probe: “When you say, `heart of the family,’ what does that mean?” Participant: “He provides for the family, you know, [he is].Step 1: The Focus Question and Eliciting Responses A first aim in the content analysis of open-ended text narratives is to identify relevant responses (and their response codes) that answer a specific focus question. This methodology, as we have developed it, is a variation of a content analysis approach–an open-ended “topic category” interview that was developed by Flannigan, McGrath, Meyer, and Garcia (1995). Also, an interview protocol that is similar to our focus question interview protocol (our Platica) is the Adult Interview Guide used in the International Resilience Project (Ungar, 2010). From our prior research, we found that the identification of relevant responses (response codes) is facilitated by framing a focus question narrowly, sometimes in the form of a sentence completion, for example, “What does being resilient mean to you?; being resilient means: _______.” Furthermore, regarding the study of a personal attribute such as machismo, we found that two focus questions are needed: (a) asking about the general concept of machismo (machismo beliefs) and (b) asking about the respondent’s own identification with these beliefs (machismo self-identification). Specifically, our Platica interview protocol consists of a series of specific focus questions. For example, to the focus question, “Please tell me what a real `macho’ man is like,” one response was that being macho is, “Someone who probably does not respect the opinions of females … but that to me it is almost a stereotype,” with the relevant response code being, “[ID536] does not respect the opinions of females.” Here, the response, “… but that to me it is almost a stereotype,” is solely a comment, and this would not be coded as a relevant response. As collected via independent in-depth audio-recorded interviews, each participant serves as a “case,” and the “case” (not the response codes) serves as the “unit of analysis.” In response to a given focus question, each participant or case will contribute zero, one, or more verbal responses (Ri), which are then used to create response codes (Cj). As we have developed this methodology, response codes that have functionally equivalent meaning are combined into a thematic category (Fk; see Figure 2). This procedure of identifying and labeling thematic categories is similar to open coding as described by Strauss and Corbin (1990), a procedure that includes discovering categories and category naming (Strauss Corbin, 1990). As an example, from our IMM studies of resilience among Hispanic leaders, community residents, and users of illegal drugs, within our audio-recorded qualitative Platica protocol, we examined machismo beliefs and machismo self-identification. First, we presented an introductory statement, “Within the Latino/Hispanic cultures and in other parts of the world, men are often described as being `manly’ or `macho’ and women are often described as being `feminine’ or `motherly.'” Subsequently, the first focus question was, “Please tell me what a real `macho’ man is like (their traits or characteristics): _________.” An example of a pattern of responses and subsequent interviewer probes is the following:J Mix Methods Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 December 11.Castro et al.PageParticipant: “Machismo is the foundation of family, [a macho] is the heart of the family.” Interviewer probe: “When you say, `heart of the family,’ what does that mean?” Participant: “He provides for the family, you know, [he is].
M2 ion-channel m2ion-channel.com
Just another WordPress site
