IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/injdan/v2y2010i3p199-216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bridging qualitative and quantitative methods for classifying policy actors into policy discourse communities: thematic analysis and formal concept analysis approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmet K. Suerdem

Abstract

Policy decision process is usually depicted as a neutral and technical process in which problem solving capacity of a policy decision determines the validity of its effectiveness. However, socio-political space is fragmented and policy making process reflects the conflicts between different socio-political actors. Empirical detection of policy networks is a problematic issue since world views reflecting policy beliefs can best be elicited in unstructured narrative forms which do not easily lend themselves to a systematic and objective classification of the narrating actors. Thus, the data for such research is usually collected through structured interviews which provide a solid basis for quantitative classification techniques such as cluster analysis. However, structured interviews are prone to imposing researcher's perspective to the data rather than reflecting the world views of the policy actors. The aim of this paper is to offer a systematic way of classifying policy actors into policy communities according to the data collected through unstructured policy narratives. For this purpose the paper proposes a method that bridges qualitative thematic analysis with quantitative formal concept analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmet K. Suerdem, 2010. "Bridging qualitative and quantitative methods for classifying policy actors into policy discourse communities: thematic analysis and formal concept analysis approaches," International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(3), pages 199-216.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:injdan:v:2:y:2010:i:3:p:199-216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=34056
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:injdan:v:2:y:2010:i:3:p:199-216. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=282 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.