Qualitative_data_analysis

188 QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS
same case. We may want to record which of the categories have been assigned to
which cases. If we are satisfied that these subcategories are conceptually distinct,
then we could regard them as values of the underlying variable ‘suffering’ and assign
these values accordingly. We could then discriminate between cases in terms of the
variable ‘suffering’ and relate this variable to others in our analysis. Of course, the
values for our variable must be exhaustive as well as exclusive, so we might include a
value such as ‘other’ (or ‘awkward’ might do as well) for any cases, such as our first
letter, where the categories are assigned in combination.
The identification of variables with exclusive and exhaustive categories might
itself be regarded as a major achievement of categorization. From a conceptual point
of view, this requires a clear distinction between the boundaries of individual
categories which can be grouped under an overarching category. The categories
must not only be ‘exclusive’; they must also relate to and express the concept embodied
in the overarching category. This is a task which I alluded to in discussing the
problems of ‘splicing’ categories. The computer can support this conceptual task by
providing quick access to category definitions and the results of assignment
decisions. From an empirical point of view, we must check that one and only one
value can be—or has been—assigned to each case. The computer can help by
allowing us to look for and deal with ‘overlaps’ where more than one value which
we want to regard as exclusive has been assigned to a case. For example, it could
locate for us those databits from the first and any other letters where more than one
of the values (‘discomfort’, ‘disfigurement’ and ‘disability’) has been assigned to the
case for the variable ‘suffering’. We can then check whether our initial assignment was
reasonable, and if so assign this a residual value such as ‘other’. Providing there are
not too many ‘others’ our variable may still prove a useful way of discriminating
between cases.
A simpler but less conceptually rewarding method of generating values is to note
the number of times a category has been assigned to a case. In Table 12.2 we
assumed our variables would have two values, either assigned or not assigned. But
what if we have assigned a category to several databits for each case? For any
category, we can treat the number of assignations as a value for each case, and then
use this as a basis for our cross-tabulations. The computer can easily identify these
values for us, and provide information about the frequencies with which categories
have been assigned to cases as well as the basis for cross-tabulating variables.
Some qualitative analysts may feel very uncomfortable with some of the
procedures we have just discussed. There is a strong aversion to numbers in some
quarters, and a reluctance to accept that numerical considerations influence
qualitative judgements. Nevertheless, it is difficult to see how, in practice, it is
possible to identify associations between categories or assess the strength of
relationships without recourse to a numerical evaluation. If we are looking for