Content Analysis

This week I read more in Grbich (2013), but my readings concerned content analysis of texts and visual documents.  Of greatest interest to me in these readings is ethnographic content analysis.  Apparently, this type of analysis employs a study of key words of documents within contexts to ascertain ideology.  A speech may be analyzed in this manner, as well as news reporting and various or other types of propaganda. Therefore, this all seems Noam Chomskyesque and had me, at least momentarily, contemplating this alternative method for an individual project. 

However, I think this form of analysis is likely more appropriate when one has very many documents to analyze or a few very long ones.  I am also not sure that enumerative analysis necessarily generates correct conclusions, since its focus is word count, though I think some broad assumptions may be made from it.  For instance, if worldle.net indicates the words elite and poor are most prominent in my dissertation, it is likely I have an interest in class issues.

As for content analysis of visual documents, I think its variations are useful but rather subjective.  However, I think the validity of visual analysis depends rather on the researcher’s specific purpose.  For example, I think research into common interpretation of images in structural analysis probably yields useful information.  I imagine the Rorschach inkblot test is based upon this type of research.  Yet, where Grbich (2013) was discussing iconology or inconography in the Mona Lisa and Guernica, I certainly often could not follow.  I also would have never noticed much of what was discussed.  Clearly, Da Vinci and Picasso had certain meanings in mind, but I might never know them.  I also make my own meaning.

Grbich, C. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.