The provider and protector. [He takes] care of the family.” Step 2: Identifying Response Codes In vivo coding–Response codes encode relevant answers to the focus question, and using Atlas. ti we have identified these by highlighting a relevant quote that answers the focus question. Within the Atlas.ti text analysis window, we also tag each response code at the beginning with the participant’s case ID number to link each response code to other quantitative data gathered in the structural interview, such as demographic variables and also outcome measures, for example, a Life Satisfaction Scale. Within Atlas.ti, our preferred coding modality is “In vivo coding,”3 which allows interactive identification and labeling (Strauss Corbin, 1990) in creating response codes and then in creating thematic categories. Step 3: Creating Thematic NIK333MedChemExpress Peretinoin categories Next, the aim of creating thematic categories consists of assigning several response codes (Cj) that have functionally equivalent meaning to a higher order (superordinate) thematic category or family (Fk).4 Family is the term used within Atlas.ti to refer to these thematic categories. Identifying thematic categories is similar to the process of “discovering categories” and naming them as described within Grounded Theory (Strauss Corbin, 1990). Within the IMM approach, a response code can be assigned to one or more thematic categories. Approach for creating thematic categories–Based on our prior research, a heuristic goal in creating thematic categories is to “create the smallest number of `strong’ thematic categories,” where strong categories contain at least 20 of the total number of response codes, thus accounting for a remarkable percentage of the explanatory variance.5 A major challenge in thematic category construction involves creating thematic categories that will replicate across independent coders, thus obtaining high intercoder concordances or reliabilities. This concordance is important, since in practice a series of thematic category solutions can be generated from the same set of (Cj) response codes. The principal aim in creating thematic categories is to attain an optimal solution, which is one (a) that consists of the same or similar thematic categories identified across independent coders and (b) that captures all relevant themes as expressed by the participants. The latter aim relates to content Peretinoin chemical information validity, “the extent to which a specific set of items [or thematic categories] fully reflects a content domain” (DeVellis, 1991, p. 43). For example, regarding machismo beliefs, we asked, “What is a real macho like,” and Coder 1 identified 10 thematic categories, with their long descriptive labels being the following: (a) “non-womanizer, respectful to women, equal opportunity”; (b) “physical control–abusive3In vivo coding is the preferred form of coding that we have used, although within Atlas.ti other types of coding that can be used are open coding, coding by list, quick coding, and auto coding. 4Atlas.ti allows the coder to create “families” during the process of coding (in vivo). From our research we found that it appears best to “create thematic categories interactively, as you go.” Emerging thematic categories can be merged or modified during this interactive process. 5The proportion of 20 as a lower-bound percentage of responses to establish a viable thematic category is a heuristic value derived from our prior research. For example, if there are 120 response codes, 20 would b.The provider and protector. [He takes] care of the family.” Step 2: Identifying Response Codes In vivo coding–Response codes encode relevant answers to the focus question, and using Atlas. ti we have identified these by highlighting a relevant quote that answers the focus question. Within the Atlas.ti text analysis window, we also tag each response code at the beginning with the participant’s case ID number to link each response code to other quantitative data gathered in the structural interview, such as demographic variables and also outcome measures, for example, a Life Satisfaction Scale. Within Atlas.ti, our preferred coding modality is “In vivo coding,”3 which allows interactive identification and labeling (Strauss Corbin, 1990) in creating response codes and then in creating thematic categories. Step 3: Creating Thematic Categories Next, the aim of creating thematic categories consists of assigning several response codes (Cj) that have functionally equivalent meaning to a higher order (superordinate) thematic category or family (Fk).4 Family is the term used within Atlas.ti to refer to these thematic categories. Identifying thematic categories is similar to the process of “discovering categories” and naming them as described within Grounded Theory (Strauss Corbin, 1990). Within the IMM approach, a response code can be assigned to one or more thematic categories. Approach for creating thematic categories–Based on our prior research, a heuristic goal in creating thematic categories is to “create the smallest number of `strong’ thematic categories,” where strong categories contain at least 20 of the total number of response codes, thus accounting for a remarkable percentage of the explanatory variance.5 A major challenge in thematic category construction involves creating thematic categories that will replicate across independent coders, thus obtaining high intercoder concordances or reliabilities. This concordance is important, since in practice a series of thematic category solutions can be generated from the same set of (Cj) response codes. The principal aim in creating thematic categories is to attain an optimal solution, which is one (a) that consists of the same or similar thematic categories identified across independent coders and (b) that captures all relevant themes as expressed by the participants. The latter aim relates to content validity, “the extent to which a specific set of items [or thematic categories] fully reflects a content domain” (DeVellis, 1991, p. 43). For example, regarding machismo beliefs, we asked, “What is a real macho like,” and Coder 1 identified 10 thematic categories, with their long descriptive labels being the following: (a) “non-womanizer, respectful to women, equal opportunity”; (b) “physical control–abusive3In vivo coding is the preferred form of coding that we have used, although within Atlas.ti other types of coding that can be used are open coding, coding by list, quick coding, and auto coding. 4Atlas.ti allows the coder to create “families” during the process of coding (in vivo). From our research we found that it appears best to “create thematic categories interactively, as you go.” Emerging thematic categories can be merged or modified during this interactive process. 5The proportion of 20 as a lower-bound percentage of responses to establish a viable thematic category is a heuristic value derived from our prior research. For example, if there are 120 response codes, 20 would b.
