The Constant Comparative Method of Qualitative Analysis

Abstract

Currently, the general approaches to the analysis of qualitative data are these:

1.) If the analyst wishes to convert qualitative data into crudely quantifiable form so that he can provisionally test a hypothesis, he codes the data first and then analyzes it. He makes an effort to code “all relevant data [that] can be brought to bear on a point,” and then systematically assembles, assesses and analyzes these data in a fashion that will “constitute proof for a given proposition.”

2.) If the analyst wishes only to generate theoretical ideas new categories and their properties, hypotheses and interrelated hypotheses- he cannot be confined to the practice of coding first and then analyzing the data since, in generating theory, he is constantly redesigning and reintegrating his theoretical notions as he reviews his material. Analysis with his purpose, but the explicit coding itself often seems an unnecessary, burdensome task. As a result, the analyst merely inspects his data for new properties of his theoretical categories, and writes memos on these properties.

We wish to suggest a third approach to the analysis of qualitative data- one that combines, by an analytic procedure of constant comparison, the explicit coding procedure of the first approach and the style of theory development of the second. The purpose of the constant comparative method of joint coding and analysis is to generate theory more systematically than allowed by the second approach, by using explicit coding and analytic procedures. While more systematic than the second approach, this method does not adhere completely to the first, which hinders the development of theory because it is designed for provisional testing, not discovering, of hypotheses. This method of comparative analysis is to be used jointly with theoretical sampling, whether for collective new data or on previously collected or compiled qualitative data.