Content Analysis in Scientific Research: Meta-Analysis, Meta-Synthesis, and Descriptive Content Analysis

Year 2018, , 176 - 190, 28.02.2018

Serkan Dinçer

https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.363159

Cited By: 98

Abstract

Considering
the research methods of the studies in the field of educational sciences, it
can be stated that studies follow similar research steps or phases though using
different terminology to refer to these steps. While such differentiated use of
terminology is significantly fewer in research designs such as experimental or
descriptive, there has been an increase in such misuse in the studies utilizing
content analysis design and the literature in the field reveals interchangeable
use of terms like technique, design, and method. Reviewing the literature
reveals mistakes in the use of content analysis since it is not only a method
of research but a method of data analysis as well. In this respect, the present
study aims to define and group the approaches on content analysis as one of the
frequently discussed and confused concept. Following an extensive literature
review, the study attempts to define content analysis and to categorize various
approaches related. The categories include meta-analysis, meta-synthesis, and
descriptive content analysis. Lastly, the issues that researchers need to pay
special attention are highlighted.

Keywords

Content analysis, Meta-analysis, Meta-synthesis

Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmalarında İçerik Analizi: Meta-Analiz, Meta-Sentez, Betimsel İçerik Analizi

Abstract

Eğitim bilimlerine ilişkin çalışmaların araştırma yöntemleri incelendiğinde, aynı işlem basamaklarına ve tanımlara sahip birçok yöntemin farklı isimlendirmelerle kullanıldığı görülmektedir. Deneysel, tarama modeli gibi araştırma yöntemlerinde bu farklılıklar görülmemesine rağmen içerik analizi ile ilgili tanım farklılıklarının oldukça fazlalaştığı; teknik, desen ve yöntemlerin birbirlerinin yerine sıklıkla kullanıldığı literatürde görülmektedir. İçerik analizinin hem araştırma yöntemi hem de veri analizi olması nedeniyle bu kullanımlarda hatalar yapıldığı literatürde görülmektedir. Literatürde tanım ve süreç olarak tartışmalı olan içerik analizinin tanımlanarak, yaklaşımlarının sınıflanması bu çalışmanın amacını oluşturmaktadır. Bu amaç çerçevesinde literatür taraması yapılarak içerik analizinin tanımı, yaklaşımları gruplanmıştır. Bu yaklaşımlar meta-analiz, meta-sentez ve betimsel içerik analizi olarak gruplanmıştır. Son olarak çalışma sonunda bu yaklaşımlar ile ilgili dikkat edilmesi gereken noktalar belirtilmiştir.

Keywords

İçerik analizi, Meta-analiz, Meta-sentez

References

• Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 258-267.
• Bair, C. R. (1999). Meta-synthesis: A new research methodology. The Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. San Antonio, Texas, (ERIC document no. ED 473 866).
• Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. New York: Free Press.
• Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. & Rothstein, H. R. (2013). Meta-analize giriş [Introduction to meta-analysis]. (Serkan Dinçer, trans.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Bowen, W. M. & Bowen, C. C. (2002). Typologies, indexing, content analysis, meta-analysis, and scaling as measurement techniques. In G. J. Miller & M. L. Whicker (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in public administration (pp. 51-86). NewYork: Marcel Dekker Inc.
• Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York: Guilford Publications.
• Cartwright, R., Khoo, A. K., & Cardozo, L. (2007). Publish or be damned? The fate of abstracts presented at the International Continence Society Meeting 2003. Neurourology and urodynamics, 26(2), 154-157.
• Campbell, R., Pound, P., Pope, C., Britten, N., Pill, R., Morgan, M. & Donovan, J. (2003). Evaluating meta-ethnography: A synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Social Science and Medicine, 56(4), 671–684.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (5th Ed.). London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
• Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (Eds.). (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). Newyork: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Çalık, M. & Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri [Parameters of content analysis]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33-38.
• Dinçer, S. (2014). Eğitim bilimlerinde uygulamalı meta-analiz. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (7. Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Higgins, J. & Green, S. (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. London: Willey.
• Jensen, L. & Allen, M. (1996). Meta-synthesis of qualitative findings. Qualitative Health Research, 6(4), 553–560.
• Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J., & Pillai, V. (2008). Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Miller, G., & Whicker, M. (1999, Eds.). Introduction. In Handbook of research methods in public administration (pp. 1- 2). NewYork: Marcel Dekker Inc.
• Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guide book. California: Sage Publications Inc.
• Noblit, G. & Hare, R. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Newbury Park: Sage.
• Park, C. (2003). In other (people's) words: Plagiarism by university students--literature and lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471-488.
• Paterson, B., Thorne, S., Canam, C. & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research. London: Sage.
• Riffe, D., Lacy, S. & Fico, F. G. (2005). Analyzing media messages. Using quantitative content analysis in research (2nd Ed.). Mahwah : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
• Sikes, P. (2009). Will the real author come forward? Questions of ethics, plagiarism, theft and collusion in academic research writing. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 32(1), 13-24.
• Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Strobel, J. & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1), 44-58.
• Walsh, D. & Downe, S. (2005). Meta‐synthesis method for qualitative research: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204-211.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta‐synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of advanced nursing, 53(3), 311-318.