Analysis of Individual Interviews
All interviews were recorded using a digital recorder.
The digital recordings were used as audio recordings
and transcribed as text using Microsoft Word. The
researcher used the conventional method of content
analysis of Hsieh and Shannon15 and used NVIVO 7
software to manage the analysis.18 The researcher
began by reading and re-reading the transcripts to as-
sist in an attitude of vigilance in the descriptions and
then began an iterative process with the data for further
understanding, to achieve immersion and obtain a
sense of the whole. The process resulted in noticing the
commonality among participant responses. Next, ex-
act words from the text were highlighted to capture
thoughts and concepts. Notes of 1st impressions and
thoughts were made. As the process continued, labels
for codes emerged, which were reflective of more than
1 thought. Codes were sorted into categories, becom-
ing the initial coding scheme. These coded categories
were organized into meaningful clusters. This initial
process demonstrated that the researcher had achieved
data saturation because no new codes emerged. There-
fore, there was no need to solicit additional partici-
pants. Lastly, a diagram was developed to organize the
categories, identify the relationships between catego-
ries and subcategories, and illustrate the process for
innovativeness.15,19 To analyze subresearch questions,
content analysis was used. Results were evaluated
based on study assumptions and the literature. Some
findings refuted the study assumptions, and some
required clarification, which was addressed in phase 2
of the study in the focus group.15
To ensure rigor and quality in both phase 1 and
phase 2, credibility was established through prolonged
engagement by the researcher with the data, data sat-
uration, and member check. During phase 2 (focus
group), participants verified findings (member check)
and confirmability was established.14
Analysis of Individual InterviewsAll interviews were recorded using a digital recorder.The digital recordings were used as audio recordingsand transcribed as text using Microsoft Word. Theresearcher used the conventional method of contentanalysis of Hsieh and Shannon15 and used NVIVO 7software to manage the analysis.18 The researcherbegan by reading and re-reading the transcripts to as-sist in an attitude of vigilance in the descriptions andthen began an iterative process with the data for furtherunderstanding, to achieve immersion and obtain asense of the whole. The process resulted in noticing thecommonality among participant responses. Next, ex-act words from the text were highlighted to capturethoughts and concepts. Notes of 1st impressions andthoughts were made. As the process continued, labelsfor codes emerged, which were reflective of more than1 thought. Codes were sorted into categories, becom-ing the initial coding scheme. These coded categorieswere organized into meaningful clusters. This initialprocess demonstrated that the researcher had achieveddata saturation because no new codes emerged. There-fore, there was no need to solicit additional partici-pants. Lastly, a diagram was developed to organize thecategories, identify the relationships between catego-ries and subcategories, and illustrate the process forinnovativeness.15,19 To analyze subresearch questions,content analysis was used. Results were evaluatedbased on study assumptions and the literature. Somefindings refuted the study assumptions, and somerequired clarification, which was addressed in phase 2of the study in the focus group.15To ensure rigor and quality in both phase 1 andphase 2, credibility was established through prolongedengagement by the researcher with the data, data sat-uration, and member check. During phase 2 (focusgroup), participants verified findings (member check)and confirmability was established.14
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
