Domain Ontology: The New Method of Mapping the Field of Qualitative Research Practices

Grzegorz Bryda; Joanna Gajda; Natalia Martini; Daniel Płatek

doi:10.18778/1733-8069.20.2.06

Authors

Grzegorz Bryda Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8892-099X
Joanna Gajda Independent scholar https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9107-0546
Natalia Martini Humboldt University of Berlin https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8254-7621
Daniel Płatek Institute of Political Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8253-3622

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8069.20.2.06

Keywords:

meta-analysis, qualitative research, domain ontology, dictionary-based content analysis, text mining

Abstract

Already in the early 1990s, one could encounter the opinion that the state in which the field of qualitative research finds itself bears the hallmarks of the ‘curse of abundance’. Since then, the phenomenon of proliferation in the field has continued to gain momentum. Due to the dynamic growth of qualitative variants of research methodologies, methods and techniques, as well as the enormous internal diversity of the field, qualitative researchers are struggling to orient themselves in the field of their own research practice. Increasingly, many researchers signal the need to systematize their knowledge of the numerous contemporary variants of qualitative research practice. This article responds to this need. It presents a model of the field of contemporary qualitative research based on the IT concept of domain ontology, developed based on a multidimensional content analysis of five dominant methodological journals presented in the form of a semantic network. The proposed model gives an insight into the essential elements of the field (epistemological approaches, data collection and analysis methods, classified into 369 ontological classes), as well as shows their clusters and inter-class relationships. It indicates the existence of three sub-fields characterized by the presence of different approaches and research methods, which differ in density and the strength of relationships. The ontological model of the qualitative research field is an important step toward the development of a domain qualitative research knowledge base, i.e., an information system organizing methodological knowledge that allows for trend monitoring, knowledge management, and effective use of knowledge in research practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Grzegorz Bryda, Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland

PhD, an Assistant Professor at Jagiellonian University’s Institute of Sociology. He specializes in Cognitive Sociology, Digital Sociology, Qualitative and Mixed Research Methodology, with a focus on AI, LLM, and NLP/NLU applications in Content and Narrative Analysis. His expertise extends to CAQDAS, Social Science Computing, Text Mining and Digital Humanities. Formerly a Senior Consultant in Statistical Analysis and Data Mining at SPSS Polska (now IBM Predictive Solutions), he served as the Rector’s Proxy for Quality Assurance Evaluation at Jagiellonian University (2008–2017). Currently, he leads the CAQDAS TM Lab and the Summer School for Qualitative Data Analysis and Research Methods.

Joanna Gajda, Independent scholar

PhD, independent scholar, political scientist, and sociologist. She worked as a lecturer at the Pedagogical University and as a researcher at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. Now, she is actively conducting a research project for business. Her research interests include the analysis of the use and application of qualitative methods in areas that are or may be defined as ‘political,’ and the potential re-analysis of qualitative data within the realm of business.

Natalia Martini, Humboldt University of Berlin

PhD, a researcher at the Georg Simmel Center for Metropolitan Studies, Humboldt University of Berlin. She has a strong interest in urban everyday life and creative methodological approaches for studying its varied spatialities and temporalities. Her work cuts across sociology and human geography, and favors an activist approach to scholarship. Natalia received her PhD from the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. She examined practices of inhabiting the city in a homeless situation. Her current research focuses on urban care.

Daniel Płatek, Institute of Political Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences

PhD, sociologist, affiliated at the Institute of Political Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences. He is engaged in research on protests and collective mobilizations, sociological theory, historical sociology, and the use of social networks in research where press mentions are the source of data. Among his interests is also the use of NLP tools to analyze the processes that govern science.

References

Archibald Mandy, Radil Amanda, Zhang Xiaozhou, Hanson William (2015), Current Mixed Methods Practices in Qualitative Research: A Content Analtextysis of Leading Journals, “International Journal of Qualitative Methods”, vol. 14(2), pp. 5–33, https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691501400205
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691501400205

Atkinson Paul (2005), Qualitative Research – Unity and Diversity, “Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research”, vol. 6(3), https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-6.3.4
Google Scholar

Bryda Grzegorz (2014), CAQDAS, Data Mining i odkrywanie wiedzy w danych jakościowych, [in:] J. Niedbalski (ed.), Metody i techniki odkrywania wiedzy. Narzędzia CAQDAS w procesie analizy danych jakościowych, Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, pp. 13–40.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/7969-549-2.02

Bryda Grzegorz (2019), From CAQDAS to Text Mining. The Domain Ontology as a Model of Knowledge Representation About Qualitative Research Practices, [in:] P.A. Costa, L.P. Reis, A. Moreira (eds.), Computer Supported Qualitative Research, New Trends on Qualitative Research, Berlin–Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 72–88, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-31787-4_6 (accessed: 1.09.2023).
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31787-4_6

Bryda Grzegorz (2020), Whats and Hows? The Practice-Based Typology of Narrative Analyses, “Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, vol. XVI, no. 3, pp. 120–142, https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8069.16.3.08
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8069.16.3.08

Bryda Grzegorz, Tomanek Krzysztof (2014), Od CAQDAS do Text Miningu. Nowe techniki w analizie danych jakościowych, [in:] J. Niedbalski (ed.), Metody i techniki odkrywania wiedzy. Narzędzia CAQDAS w procesie analizy danych jakościowych, Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, pp. 191–218.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/7969-549-2.10

Chenail Ronald J. (2009), Communicating Your Qualitative Research Better, “Family Business Review”, vol. 22(2), pp. 105–108.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486509334795

Denzin Norman, Lincoln Yvonna (eds.) (1994), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Google Scholar

Denzin Norman, Lincoln Yvonna (eds.) (2005), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edit, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Google Scholar

Denzin Norman, Lincoln Yvonna (eds.) (2011), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Fourth Edi, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Google Scholar

Duevel Casey (2019), SAGE Research Methods, “The Charleston Advisor”, vol. 19(4), pp. 38–41, https://doi.org/10.5260/chara.19.4.38
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.5260/chara.19.4.38

Gruber Thomas (1993), A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications, “Knowledge Acquisition”, vol. 5(2), pp. 199–220.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/knac.1993.1008

Helbig Hermann (2006), Knowledge Representation and the Semantics of Natural Language, Berlin–Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Google Scholar

Jurafsky Daniel, Martin James (2009), Speech and language processing: An introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics, and speech recognition, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Google Scholar

Knoblauch Hubert, Flick Uwe, Maeder Christoph (2005), Qualitative Methods in Europe: The Variety of Social Research, “Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung”, vol. 6(3), https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-6.3.3
Google Scholar

Lester Jessica Nina, O’Reilly Michelle (2015), Is Evidence-Based Practice a Threat to the Progress of the Qualitative Community? Arguments From the Bottom of the Pyramid, “Qualitative Inquiry”, vol. 21(7), pp. 628–632.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414563808

Lim Soo-Yeon, Song Mu-Hee, Lee Sang-Jo (2004), The Construction of Domain Ontology and Its Application to Document Retrieval, [in:] T. Yakhno (ed.), Advances in Information Systems. ADVIS 2004, “Lecture Notes in Computer Science”, vol. 3261, Berlin–Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 117–127, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30198-1_13
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30198-1_13

Munn Katherine, Smith Barry (2008), Applied Ontology: An Introduction, Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110324860

Newman Mark, Barabási Albert-László, Watts J. Duncan (eds.) (2006), The Structure and Dynamics of Networks, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar

Quillian M. Ross (1968), Semantic memory, [in:] M. Minsky (ed.), Semantic information processing, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 216–270.
Google Scholar

Ravenek Michael John, Rudman Debbie Laliberte (2013), Bridging Conceptions of Quality in Moments of Qualitative Research, “International Journal of Qualitative Methods”, vol. 12(1), pp. 436–456.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200122

Sandelowski Margarete, Barroso Julie (2003), Classifying the Findings in Qualitative Studies, “Qualitative Health Research”, vol. 13(7), pp. 905–923.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303253488

Short Jeremy C., McKenny Aaron F., Reid Shane W. (2018), More Than Words? Computer-Aided Text Analysis in Organizational Behavior and Psychology Research, “Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior”, vol. 5(1), pp. 415–435, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104622
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104622

Taylor Chris, Coffey Amanda (2009), Editorial – Special Issue: Qualitative Research and Methodological Innovation, “Qualitative Research”, vol. 9(5), pp. 523–526.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109350355

Travers Max (2009), New Methods, Old Problems: A Sceptical View of Innovation in Qualitative Research, “Qualitative Research”, vol. 9(2), pp. 161–179.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794108095079

Wang Dashun, Barabási Albert-László (2021), The Science of Science, Cambridge: University Press.
Google Scholar

Wiedemann Gregor (2013), Opening up to Big Data: Computer-Assisted Analysis of Textual Data in Social Sciences, “Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research”, vol. 14(2), https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-14.2.1949
Google Scholar

Wiles Rose, Crow Graham, Pain Helen (2011), Innovation in Qualitative Research Methods: A Narrative Review, “Qualitative Research”, vol. 11(5), pp. 587–604.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111413227