Grounded Theory - Line-by-line Coding

In this 6 minute video, Graham R Gibbs discusses further aspects of approaches to open coding and examines examples of line-by-line coding.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...

[@GrahamRGibbs]

I don't think line-by-line coding should be used all the time. I tend to use it when I need to force myself to focus strongly and inductively on what is being said. It can be used as a way of generating new ideas about the interpretation and the coding. Sometimes it is a good way of starting coding, just to get yourself going.

[@michaelcarl2763]

There are many computational linguistics methods that could be used to extract keywords or the most salient words per line etc. You could then extract and cluster the keywords, compute hypernyms, synonyms, similarities/differences of contexts assess differences between various interviews/documents etc.etc. How do you see such methods fit int GT? Would the inclusion of such computer-based methods still be part of GT? Why is that not part of the repository you are using? It should give you a much more objective (and grounded!) analysis.

[@qualitativeresearcher]

Great points, as I said in the separate comment, it just helps you ensure you don't miss anything important, particularly in the early stages of analysis when you simply don't know What's important! :)

[@TonyReeves247]

This was super-helpful Graham, thank you very much for sharing. With three days left to analyse data I am now confident that I'll be able to do it, your tutorial has saved my bacon :)

[@melaniestefan714]

Thank you for all those videos; these are extremely helpful!

[@AdolfoHickmannProf]

Dear professor Gibbs: Thank you for those videos! They will help my research a lot! All the best! Prof. Adolfo Hickmann

[@Skyrad01]

i've learnt more watching your videos than through a year of University lectures. Thank you.

[@clawme69]

Thank you for taking the time to upload your videos on qualitative data analysis. They have been useful to me as I work on my own research project.

[@DorotkaMaKotka]

Really great and helpful set of videos, thank you!

[@ramlanjantan6533]

thank you Prof. it was really helpful, and as you said, here i quoted ' just to get your self going' it's make sense and now i already started something. Only god can repay your wisdom.

[@qualitativeresearcher]

Great content Graham, I particularly LOVE the statement that you get to the point when "you can't think properly any more" and this is how line-by-line coding helps. This is exactly why I argue, and explain to my students, this approach is so valuable - I also say "if you don't know what to code, code EVERYTHING" - by doing line by line coding, you will not miss anything, there is a better chance that you will Eventually start to see patterns in the data.

[@GrahamRGibbs]

I like that recommendation. However, I find that students starting out with line-by-line coding often simply summarize what the respondent has said. In other words their coding remains at a simple descriptive level. The next step, I think, is to get them to go back and examine all the codes they have come up with and identify those that are more analytics or pointing to theory and then develop those. In that sense, coding is not merely tagging. Thinking about the codes and developing the ideas is a key component.

[@qualitativeresearcher]

@@GrahamRGibbs I agree with everything you say here. With regard to summarizing, however, I think that Charmaz actually recommends starting with gerunds summarizing each line in the very first run of analysis. Thus, if a participant says "they called me from work and said I have the job", we would first code it as simply "being accepted to work" (or in the extreme case "receiving a phone call from work....") or something like this. It may sound very odd and unnecessary, and I definitely don't want to argue that this would be a thing to do every time we want to start coding a document, but this "hardcore" version of line-by-line coding has helped me a couple of times, actually. I found that it 1) helps me to stay focused on the text and familiarize with it a bit better (maybe this is because I have a very visual type of memory, so I find writing something down more effective than reading it), and 2) even these extremely detailed summaries tend to reappear throughout the text, which is the first indication of which topics were covered more extensively. I agree that after this, the next step is to really start thinking analytically, so right after this first, detailed run, we need to start merging the codes and minimizing their number - this is a very "responsible" step because here our analytic thinking begins to really play a role. And I also agree that someone may misinterpret the idea of line-by-line coding and think that the extensive (initial) coding framework that results from it is actually the final outcome of coding (I actually had someone arguing with me recently over this, and this person argued how unpractical and unnecessary it is to have such a framework, as if it was supposed to be the final product of analysis) :) Anyway, thank you for this content, I really enjoy watching your lectures!

[@Conscious_Communication]

You, sir, must be an immensely valuable advisor to your students.

[@rosegumbo683]

Thank you so much you have helped me pick the trees from the woods 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿

[@ChiTwnCutie]

Excellent example! Thank you!

[@vasudha4421]

Amazing!! Thank you. I am grateful!

[@turkishluv]

Thank you so much for doing this.

[@tiefkuhler]

Really great. A real life saver. thank you!

[@hauwamahuta3308]

Thanks for this.

[@ckatekaew]

Thank you very much for sharing grounded theory research which is useful to me as I work on my thesis.....

[@Sr4l3]

I work on my thesis too. In a class on GT I produced a long code list. But since these codes did not imply analytic descriptions I had problems to conceptualize the data. I think more important than the status of a code are the analytical questions towards the phenomena. So I try to conceptualize from the beginning, drawing characteristics and their possible dimensions of phenomena. A code is the name idea of a analytical description. When a code is saturated I move on in line by line coding.

[@steventmhess]

You are a god. Thank you!

[@faezanetfa651]

Thank you, it is helpfully

[@h31d11]

I'm using this line-by-line coding in my current study on cultural aspects of diplomacy. I'm transcribing a recorded interview and coding it as I go on. I'm inclined to the constructivist approach and take into consideration the researcher's (myself) influence in the research and the data gathering (interview). The question is: do you think that should I also transcribe the interview questions word for word and code them?

[@GrahamRGibbs]

It is normal to transcribe the questions and any other comments from the interviewer as well. In your case you will find that very useful. It means that you can see how you have phrased questions and prompts depending on what the respondent said and how the way you posed the questions might have influenced the kind of answers the respondent provided and the way in which they did that. I see no reason not to code the questions too, but I would use a different set of codes from those you have used for the respondent's talk.

[@h31d11]

Thank you very much! This was very helpful!

[@andrewroberts3272]

Graham, it is interesting that you don't explicitly suggest and or describe the use of gerunding. Glaser talks a lot about this. When and how best should it be used. My first run at coding led me to textual labelling rather than coding so I am keen to understand more about gerunding as a way of getting away from the possibility of content analysis. You also don't mention the two questions Glaser suggests we ask of the data? This may be mentioned elsewhere? Are you suggesting these are not necessary/ essential? I find continually answering these two questions- what is going on? and how is it being solved/resolved by the participant hinders creativity. Your feedback would be most helpful. I find the videos excellent as there are no training/ seminars on GT where I come from- a real pity. many thanks Andrew

[@apurvasinghai7224]

How to know when one line ends and other starts?

[@DaseinFly]

Is Line by Line coding seen as 'necessary' for doing Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis? I can understand doing Line by Line Analysis, but I find it would be rather tedious to try to code every line of every transcript for an entire project...even if there are only 11 transcripts. Any thoughts?

[@clawme69]

Thank you for taking the time to upload your videos on qualitative data analysis. They have been useful to me as I work on my own research project.