Qualitative content analysis is defined as the subjective interpretation of text data through systematic classification and coding to identify themes and patterns. It can be used with both qualitative and quantitative data in either an inductive or deductive manner. Content analysis is a valid research method used to make inferences from data and provide new insights. It involves preparing the data, organizing it into categories, and reporting the results. The trustworthiness of content analysis relies on clearly linking the data to the results.

1. Content analysis

2. Qualitative content analysis has been defined as:
• “a research method for the subjective
interpretation of the content of text data through
the systematic classification process of coding
and identifying themes or patterns” (Hsieh &
Shannon, 2005, p.1278),

3. • Content analysis is a method of analysing
written, verbal or visual communication
messages (Cole 1988)
• Content analysis as a research method is a
systematic and objective means of description
and quantifying phenomena (Downe-
Wamboldt 1992) It is also recognised as a
method of analysing documents.

4. • Content analysis is a research method used for
making replicable and valid inferences from
data to their context, with the purpose of
providing knowledge, a representation of facts
, new insights, and a practical guide to action.
(Krippendorff 1980)

5. • “any qualitative data reduction and sense-
making effort that takes a volume of
qualitative material and attempts to identify
core consistencies and meanings” (Patton,
2002, p.453).

6. • “an approach of empirical, methodological
controlled analysis of texts within their context of
communication, following content analytic rules
and step by step models, without rash
quantification” (Mayring, 2000, p.2), and

7. The aim of using content analysis
• To attain a condensed and broad description
of phenomenon.
• The outcome of the analysis is concepts or
categories describing the phenomenon.

8. Two approaches
• Content analysis can be used both
quantitative and qualitative data.
• It can also be used in an inductive and
deductive way.
(Elo & Kyngas 2007)

9. • The categories are derived from the data in
inductive content analysis.
• Deductive content analysis is utilised when
the structure of analysis is operationalised on
the basis of previous knowledge and the
propose of the study is theory testing .
(Kyngas & Vanhanen 1999)

10. Inductive approach
Specific General
Deductive approach
General Specific

11. The Critics Debate
• Morgan (1993) argued that the method found
its critics in the quantitative field, who
considered it to be a simplistic technique that
did not lend itself to detailed statistical
analysis, while others considered that content
analysis was not adequately qualitative in
nature.

12. • Thus, the differentiation of content analysis was
limited to classifying it primarily as a qualitative
vs. quantitative research method (Hsieh &
Shannon 2005)
• Weber (1990) mentioned that it is possible to
attain the simplistic results by adopting any
method, if the skills of analysis are lacking.
• Whilst, Neundorf (2002) argued the truth is that
this method is as easy or difficult as the
researcher determines it to be.

13. Content analysis process
Preparation phase
Elo and Kyngas 2007
Selecting the unit of
analysis
Making sense of data
and whole
Developing
Organising phase structured analysis
Open coding matrice
Developing
Coding sheet Analysis Matrice
Data coding
Grouping Data gathering according the
by content categories
Categorisation
Hypothesis testing
Abstraction correspondence
Reporting phase comparison to earlier
studies etc.
Model, conceptual system, conceptual
map or categories

14. Preparation phase
• Start with selecting the unit of analysis
• This can be a word or a theme
• Deciding on what to analyse in what detail
• Sampling considerations are vital factors before
selecting the unit of analysis (cavanage 1997)
• The sample must be representative of the
universe from which it is drawn (Duncan 1989)
• Probability or judgment sampling is necessary
when a document is too large to be analysed in
its entirety (GAO 1996)

15. • The unit of analysis can also be a letter, word,
sentence, portion of pages or words, the
number of participants in discussion or the
time used for discussion depending on the
research question (Polir & Beck 2004)

16. • When starting the analysis, the researcher
must decide whether to analyse only the
manifest content or latent content.
• The aim of latent content is to notice silence,
sighs, laughter, posture, etc. (burns & Grove
2005)

17. When reading the data
The questions are:
• Who is telling you?
• Where is this happening?
• When did it happen?
• What is happening?
• Why does it happens?

18. Inductive Content analysis
• This means the researcher are organising the
qualitative data, and this process includes…
1. Open coding
2. Creating categories
3. Abstraction

19. Step model of inductive category development (MAYRING 2000) [11]

20. Open coding
• It means that notes and headings are written
in the text while reading it.
For example
The patient who suffered from
Malaria can results in high fever Cold symptoms
with chilling .

21. • After open coding, the lists of categories are
grouped under higher headings.
• The aim of grouping data is to reduce the number
of categories by collapsing those are similar or
different into broader higher order categories.
• The propose of generating higher categories is to
provide a means of describing the phenomenon,
and to enhance understanding and generate
knowledge (Cavanagh 1977)

22. Generating abstract/ theme
• Abstract means formulating a general
description of the research topic through
generating categories (Polit and Beck 2004).
• Each category is named by using content-
characteristic words.

23. Sub-category Generic category Main category
Headache
Physical symptoms
Stomachache
Vomiting
Stress Emotional problems
Treats from Studying
depress PhD
Expensive fee
Economic effects
living expense
Low income

24. Deductive Content Analysis
• Deductive content analysis is often adopted
when the researcher tends to retest existing
data in a new context (Catanzaro 1988).

25. Step model of deductive category application (MAYRING 2000) [14]

26. When deductive content analysis starts,
• The next step is to develop a categorisation
matrix, and to code the data according to the
categories.
Dependence Worries Sadness Guilt
What kind of mental
well-being treats does
Diabetes have for teenagers
An example from a categorisation matrix

27. Dependence Worries
What kind of mental Dependence on parents Worries about future
well-being treats does Dependence on insulin Worries about health conditions
Diabetes have for teenagers Dependence on nurses Worries about future occupation
Dependence on physicians Worries about getting family
Dependences on eating habit Worries about energy
Dependence on fashion Worries about image
An example of coding the data to the categorisation matrix

28. • After a categorisation matrix has been
developed, all the data are reviewed for
content and coded for correspondence with
or exemplification of identified categories
(Polit & Beck 2004)
• Deductive content analysis can ne used either
a structured or unconstrained matrix
depending n the aim of the study

29. Different propose of study
• In unconstrained matrix, different categories
are created within its bounds, following the
principles of inductive content analysis.
• In structured matrix, only aspects that the
matrix of analysis are chosen from the data
that fit the categorisation frame or
alternatively, to choose those that do
not(Patton 1990).

30. Trustworthiness
• Sufficient detail and clear understanding for
the reader can result in the validity of the
result.
• Element of the validity in content analysis are
universal to any qualitative research design.
• Creating categories is both empirical and
conceptual challenge, as categories must be
conceptually and empirically grounded (Dey
1993).

31. • Successful content analysis requires that the
researcher can analyse and simplify the data
from categories that reflect the subject of study
in reliable manner (Kyngas and Vanhanen 1999)
• How well categories cover the data can promote
creditability (Graneheim and Lundman 2004).
• To increase reliability of the study, it is necessary
to demonstrate the links between the data and
results.
• Appendices and tables may be useful to present
the links and the results.

32. • To felicitate transferability, the researcher
should give a clear description of the context,
selection and characteristic of participants,
data collection and process of analysis.
• Demonstration is needed of the reliability of
the finding and interpretations to enable
someone else to follow the process and
procedures of the inquiry.

33. • Authentic citations can be used to increase
the trustworthiness of the research and to
point out the readers from where and kind of
original data were formulated (Patton 1990).
• The internal validity of content analysis can be
assessed as face validity or by using
agreement coefficients (Weber 1990).

34. • There are various way to seek the agreement
• Co-researcher could come up with alternative
interpretation (Peer validation).
• The use of panel expert to support concept
production or coding issues is required to
content validation.

35. References
Backman K. & Hentinen M. (2001) Factors associated with the self care of home-dweeling
elderly. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science 15, 195-202.
Backman K. & Kyngas H. (1998) Challengers of the grounded theory approach to a novice
researcher. Hoitotiede 10, 263-270.
Cavanagh S. (1997) Content Analysis: concept, method and applications. Nurse Researcher 4,
5-16.
Cole F.L. (1988) Content analysis process and application. Clinical Nurse Specialist 2(1),53-57.
Day I. (1993) Qualitative data analysis. A User-Friendly Guide for social Scientist. Routledge,
London
Elo S. & Kyngas H. (2007) The qualitative content analysis process. Research Methodology 2(1),
104-115.
GAO (1996) Content analysis a Methodology for Structuring and Analysing Written Material.
Programme Evaluation and Methodology Division, United States General Accounting Office,
Washington.
Graneheim U.H. & Lundman B. (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research:
concept, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today 5, 282-
293.