1. Content Analysis

2. Content Analysis
 Multiple Definitions
 Background
 Applications and Procedure
 An Illustration
 Consistency within Diversity
 Growth
 Reliability
 Validity

3. General Definitions
 “...a research technique that uses a set of procedures
to make valid inferences from text” (Weber, 1990, p. 9)
 A summarizing, quantitative analysis of messages relying on
scientific method and not limited to types of variables measured or
context of messages (Neuendorf, 2002)
 "Any technique for making inferences by objectively and systematically
identifying specified characteristics of messages” (Holsti, 1969 p. 14)

4. Definitions (continued)
 “...technique for objective, systematic, & quantitative description of
manifest content communication” ( Berelson, 1952, p. 18)
 “ …systematic, replicable data reduction technique, compressing many
words of text into content categories based on explicit rules of
coding” (Stemler, 2001)
 “Close analysis of explicit and implicit messages of a text through
classification and evaluation of key concepts, symbols, and themes to
determine
meaning and explain its effect it on the audience” (Reitz, 2004)
 “...systematic reading of texts and symbolic matter not necessarily from an
author’s or user's perspective” (Krippendorf, 2004, p. 3)

5. Essential Purpose
Who (says) What (to) Whom (in) what Channel (with) What
Effect? (Lasswell, 1948)

6. Goal of Content Analysis
 To draw inferences about:
 A text
 To obtain documentary evidence about:
 A sender
 A message
 A receiver (audience)

7. Procedures
 Communication transmission model (manifest
content)
 Semiotic model (latent content) of the signifier and
the signified

8. Historical Antecedents

9. Analysis of Texts
 Researchers have analyzed texts since the start of
writing
 Content analysis draws on Aristotelian principles of
textual analysis as described in “Poetics”
 Subject of text
 Creator
 Audience
 Purpose
 Context
 Ethos
 Pathos

10. Analysis of Texts
 Medieval Scholastics recognized latent meanings of words,
leading to categories
 First documented content analysis:
 18th century Sweden
 Collection of religious hymns blamed for subverting orthodox state
church and inciting dissent
 Words and symbols in songs were same as orthodox hymnal, but
occurred in different contexts (Dovring, 1951; Krippendorf, 2009)

11. Analysis of Texts
 During early 20th century Weber studied content of newspapers
raising fundamental questions:
 How do newspapers affect readers?
 How do the contents of newspapers compare quantitatively over a
generation?
 What is carried as news
 What is carried as editorial
 What is omitted
 Weber is regarded as a pioneer in the sociology of the press

12. Psychological Analysis
 Gordon Allport
 Pioneer in personality theory
 Analyzed “Letters to Jenny” (Diary)
 Aimed to understand her experienced world by identifying
psychological traits as expressed in her letters and diaries
(Krippendorf& Bock, 2009)

13. Content Analysis
Topics

14. Content Analysis and Data
 The Effect of Semantics on Public Opinion and Propaganda
 Program Effectiveness
 Readability of Text
 Television Violence
 Library Transactions
 Characteristics of Reference Questions
 Personality Traits
 Determination of Authorship

15. Questions for Content Analysis
 “How are minority ethnic groups treated in short stories in popular
magazines?” (Berelson, 1952)
 “How can communications be tested for propaganda elements?”
 “What ways do motion pictures reflect popular feelings and desires?”
 “What are the dominant images in Shakespeare’s plays?”
 “What happens to a good book when it becomes a movie?”
 “How do criteria used for program effectiveness reflect program
objectives?”
 How do attitudes reflect personality structure?
 What domains are currently being studied in library and information
science?

16. A Quantitative Illustration
Research Problem:
 What role does popular magazine fiction play in
affecting attitudes toward ethnic minorities?
(Berelson and Salter, 1946)

17. Hypotheses Asserted
 Sympathetic characters are from the majority
 Unsympathetic characters are from minorities and usually
unsympathetic and secondary
 Social interaction between majority and minority groups
seldom occurs.
 When interaction occurs, minority group in a subordinate position.
 The problems of majority and minority groups differ
 The majority has individual (personal) problems
 The minority has social and economic problems
 The goals of the majority (love, comfort) more approved than
goals of the minority (material gain).

18. Hypothesis and Categories
 Hypotheses were translated into categories – a priori assignation
 The first hypothesis yielded 3 categories for analysis:
 Ethnic identification of character
 Role in the story
 Level of approval (sympathy for character)
 Other hypotheses provide more categories:
 Socio-economic status of characters
 Kind of interaction
 Problems
 Goals
 After categories for the hypotheses are exhausted, they can be
addressed by potential data

19. Final Step in Analysis
 Establish Categories
 Determine Indicators (a priori)
 First general category was ethnicity
 Indicators of ethnicity rarely explicit
(i.e. “He was Italian-American”)
 Indirect indicators of ethnicity conceived – indicators involved names (i.e.
Antonio), language, appearance, memberships, etc.
 Second category was character’s role in story
 Was the role major or minor?
 Indicator was the space allotted to specific character
 Third category was socio-economic level
 Indicator included characteristics as occupation, education, income, possessions,
standard of living, etc.
 After examining the stories other categories and indicators were noted. These
emergent categories extended the hypothesis (a posteriori)

20. Krippendorf’s Six Procedural Questions

21. The Basic Steps
 Which data are analyzed? (Unit of Analysis)
 How are data defined? (Definition of Terms--these are the variables to
measure. Both internal and external validity come into play here.)
 What is the population or unit from which the sampling data are drawn?
(Sampling Frame or Unit of Sampling)
 What is the context relative to which the data are analyzed?
 What are the boundaries of the analysis?
 What is the target of inference?
 Code Book - Coding Form

22. Comparison: Berelson’s Study and
Krippendorf’s 6 Questions
Krippendorf Berelson
1. What data are analyzed? 1. Units of analysis are words.
2. How are the data defined? 2. Data defined by categories and
their indicators.
3. What is the population or unit
from which the sampling data are 3. Frame is fictional story in
drawn? popular magazine.
4. What is the context relative to 4. Context involves attitudes
which the data are analyzed? toward ethnicities.
5. What are the boundaries of the 5. Boundary is single story in
analysis? selection of magazines.
6. What is the target of inference? 6. Do indicators support
hypothesis?

23. Two Methods
Qualitative and Quantitative Procedures

24. Content, System, Goals
 The objective of content analysis is determining answers
to questions that the text implies – explicitly and implicitly
It is a systematic technique of “reading between the lines”
 Can this goal be attained most effectively with quantitative or
qualitative techniques?
 Distinguishing feature between 2 approaches is starting
point:
 hypothesis or grounded induction
 methods of deriving categories
 what depth of communication accepted as an indicator

25. Quantitative Procedures
 Content analysis starts with the hypothesis
 Categories derived from possibilities of hypothesis
 Categories established a priori and indicators based on
manifest (surface) meaning

26. Qualitative Procedures
 Qualitative approach derives categories after examining
document – emergent coding
 Factors in latent meanings of words or messages
 Context and proximity suggest the intended
meaning of a message

27. Media: Qualitative Analysis
 Narrative Analysis (focus on literary composition and structure)
 Rhetorical Analysis examines properties of text; emphasis not on meaning,
but how meaning is conveyed)
 Discourse Analysis – examines manifest language in text – language and
word
usage
 Semiotic Analysis – focus is on latent meanings and deep structures
 Interpretive Analysis – formation of theory from observation
 Conversation Analysis – used by social scientists in psychology,
communications and sociology
 Critical Analysis – analyzes media messages (how are groups
represented in media of all forms)

28. Consistency within Diversity
 The definitions, uses, and techniques vary according to
whether the researcher conducts a quantitative study
or a qualitative study
 Content analysis stipulates three core conditions for
qualitative or quantitative character of study
 These central conditions include:
 Objectivity
 System
 Generality (Holsti, 1969)

29. Objectivity (Holsti, 1969)
 The test of objectivity is whether another researcher,
following identical procedures with the same data, can arrive
at a similar conclusion
 Objectivity, in content analysis, means that explicit rules and procedures
guide the research process
 For example, what criteria will be applied in formulating a category?
 What criteria determines content unit (word, theme, webpage, animation,
imagery, kinds of imagery, narrative, dialogue, space, advertisements,
maps, transactions)?
 Objectivity requires researcher explicitly state ground a category is
selected
and what rationale prompts one inference rather than an alternative

30. System
 Systematic procedures facilitate objective, unbiased
selection of content and categories (Holsti, 1969)
 Assigning firm rules to regulate inclusion & exclusion
of content and categories prevents researcher from
biased, self-serving selection
 Rules preclude an analyst from intentional or
unintentional bias in selecting only content or category
supporting hypothesis, proposition, or self-interest.

31. Generality
 Select content based on clear definitions for determining
content and categories – fosters objectivity
 Establish procedures for inclusion or exclusion of data --
contributes towards consistency and systematic, impartial
selection
 Promote principled, legitimate descriptive analysis with
systematic procedures – provides a basis for generalizing
about the data collection
 Relate data to an established theory or reasoned proposition
for data to be conclusive or meaningful

32. Thorny Issues
Quality & Quantity ~
Manifest Content and Latent Content

33. Arguments Refined
 Quantitative and qualitative methods are different approaches to investigating same
problem
 Must content analysis be defined by quantitative or qualitative methodologies?
 Holsti (1969) holds that other measures besides quantitative frequency counts &
enumeration valid
 Alternative method of quantifying data with greater refinement is “contingency analysis”
 Contingency analysis codes presence or absence of a trait within document or unit of
sampling. Inferences derived from proximity of two or more units of analysis in sampling unit
 The use of quantitative procedures or qualitative is not an either/or issue -- they can
interact
 Restriction to quantitative analysis has been criticized on several grounds
 Such restriction leads to bias in the problems to consider
 It is also stated that qualitative methods can result in more meaningful or descriptive
inferences

34. Manifest and Latent Content
Considerations:
Must content analysis be restricted to manifest content – or
surface meanings; elements “physically present &
countable” (Neuendorf, 2002 p. 23)
Holsti offers compelling example of limits of manifest content.
 Limit to manifest content would not yield this notion
 Describes patient in mental hospital who states he is in
Switzerland. In this case, the patient’s meaning of Switzerland is
“freedom.” By stating he is in Switzerland, he is stating that he
wants freedom.
 Latent content & meaning would provide the context whereby the
receiver of the message would understand the idiosyncratic
meaning.
 Latent content need not be dismissed. However, as Holsti
emphasizes, it should be verified by “independent evidence.”

35. A Growing Trend
 During early 20th century Max Weber applied techniques of content
analysis to journalism when he introduced the notion of studying
the sociology of the press (Weber, 1924)
 Over 24 years -- 1971-1995, Riffe&Freitag (1997) noted six-fold
increase in number of content analyses appearing in journal, J&MC
Quarterly
 Software applications and the WWW enable text & data analysis
Neuendorf (2002) reported more than 24 text content analysis
programs are available (THAT WAS 9 YEARS AGO)
 Many electronic content analysis applications now available – text,
audio, video

36. Reliability
 Reliability measured basically in two ways (Stemler, 2001)
 Stability – (intra-rater reliability Does same coder get same results
again and again?
 Reproducibility – (inter-rater reliability) Do different coders, rating
the same text, get the same results?

37. Internal Validity
 Internal validity is degree a procedure of measurement represents
the defined concept
 Does the procedure measure what one intends to measure?
 Research question determines what one intends to measure
 In previous example, the concern was how individuals in majority
population and minority population were characterized in fictional stories
carried by popular magazines
 Study valid if results of inquiry yield data related to this concern
and research question

38. External Validity
 External validity or the ability to generalize to the wider
population, depends largely on the soundness of one’s
sampling technique and sample
 Need experimental controls or validity becomes serious
concern
 Triangulation or independent corroboration is one means of
establishing validity
 Another involves conducting same inquiry using another method of
inquiry – formal experimental design employing surveys or
qualitative procedure with focus group/interviews

39. Flowchart: Qualitative

40. Bibliography
Allport. G. (1965). Letters from Jenny. In K. Krippendorff& M. Bock (Eds.), The content
analysis reader (p. 28-37). London: Sage. Print.
Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities.
Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley Pub. Co. Retrieved from http://
www.questia.com
Krippendorf, K. (2003). Introduction to Content Analysis. CA: Sage. Print
Krippendorff, K. & Bock, M. A. (2009). The Content Analysis Reader. CA:
Sage. Print.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. London: Sage.
Online resource: http://academic.csuohio.edu/kneuendorf/content
Reitz, J. M. (2004). Dictionary for library and information science. CN: Libraries Unlimited.
(Print).
Riffe, D. &Freitag, A. (1997). A content analysis of content analyses: Twenty-five years of
Journalism Quarterly. J&MC, 74, 4, 873-882.

41. Bibliography (continued)
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment,
Research and Evaluation, 7 (17). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net
Weber, M. (1924). Toward a sociology of the press: An early proposal for
content analysis. In K. Krippendorff& M. Bock (Eds.), The content analysis
reader (p. 9-11). London: Sage. Print.
Weber, R. (1990). Basic Content Analysis. London: Sage. Print.

42. Thanks very much!
Florence M. Paisey, April 2011