Analysis of the data

The preliminary step of the overall analysis process was to listen and transcribe the podcast series. This was followed by the guidelines of Braun and Clarke (2006) for thematic analysis to identify and construct the themes from the data set. From this, narrative analysis is adopted to construct the narratives from the identified themes. At this stage, theories are developed and tested to themes to

give predictive explanations of the stories. As the interviews in the podcast series were not conducted by me and the topics addressed in the interviews cover a variety of areas beyond the scope of this analysis, the study adopts primarily a theory driven and deductive approach to identify the relevant aspects from the data with the use of selected theories relevant to answer the research questions. Elements from data-driven approach are included in cases where surprising and unpredictable findings are identified which may contradict the theoretical grounds. (Alasuutari 2011.) These analytical decisions are based on the fact that this research does not aim to test any specific hypotheses that would propose theory-based approach, as the aim is rather to explore what the data entails in reflection to specific theoretical underpinnings. This stage corresponds many qualitative procedures, for example thematic content analysis which is adopted here (Squire 2008, 50). The further narrative analysis depends on how the ‘narrative’ is defined. Polkinghorne (1995, 5) defines narrative as “the type of discourse composition that draws together diverse events, happenings, and actions of human lives into thematically unified goal-directed processes”. However, in the general extension of the term, narrative has been used to signify primary linguistic expressions for instance data in the form of field notes or interview data and their written transcriptions (Polkinghorne 1995, 6). This research adopts the extended definition of the narrative as it’s based on the assumption that qualitative inquiries are concerned essentially with linguistic expressions rather than decontextualized phrases that are abstracted from their sources (Polkinghorne 1995, 6). The adopted narrative analysis follows the guidelines by Polkinghorne (1995). The final outcome of the analysis aims to produce narratives, or narrated explanations of the topic of inquiry, peacebuilding in Africa.

4.4.1. Forming the themes

The analysis begins by using thematic analysis that is theoretically positioned within the constructivist epistemology. The adopted method in thematic analysis is used in this study to find repeated patterns of meaning in the data (Sundler, Lindberg, Nilsson & Palmér 2019, 734). The structure of the thematic analysis adopted in this study follows loosely19 _{the guidelines by Braun and}

Clarke (2006, 87) where the process is divided into six phases; 1) familiarizing with the data; 2) generating initial codes; 3) searching for themes; 4) reviewing themes; 5) defining and naming themes; and 6) producing the report. As the analysis combines thematic analysis and narrative analysis, the phase six is not included as the defined themes are further analyzed though narrative

19 _{The step-by-step guide to apply the thematic analysis model by Braun & Clarke (2011, 86) is adapted to fit the} characteristics by combining the stage 6 to narrative analysis: instead of producing themes as the final product, the themes are used to produce narratives by using the stage 6 guidelines.

analysis which produces the final products of this study, the narratives about the peacebuilding in Africa by the podcasts. Applications of the phases will be discussed more in detail below.

The first phase, familiarizing with the data, involved listening the podcast series several times to obtain a general picture of the interviews, the covered topics and interviewees’ backgrounds. This stage was followed by transcribing the interviews, where the verbatim account of all verbal utterances where included in the transcriptions (Braun & Clarke 2006, 88). This process excluded the level of detail present in transitions and other oral forms of expression which are not commonly required in thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke 2006, 88, Hirsjärvi & Hurme 2008, 139–142). Braun and Clarke (2006, 88) argue that the most important factor in transcribing the material for thematic analysis is to maintain the information that is needed from the verbal account and “in a way which is ‘true’ to its original nature” and that the process of transcribing the material is practically suited to the purpose of analysis (Edwards 1993). As the aim is to identify themes within the different interviews to produce narratives from the podcast as a whole, the level of detail in transcribing the verbatim account of all verbal utterances is sufficient.

In the second phase, generating initial codes, involved organizing the data into meaningful groups which are categorized by different techniques (Braun & Clarke 2006, 88). The coding techniques identify features of the data related to the topic under inquiry that appear interesting to the analyst and information that can be examined in a meaningful way regarding the phenomenon (Braun & Clarke 2006, 88, Boyatzis 1998, 63). This coding process was supported by the theme identification techniques presented by Ryan and Bernard (2003) to search for repetitions, similarities and differences and theory-related material. The coding process is more ‘theory-driven’ as contrary to ‘data-driven’ approach (Braun & Clarke 2006, 88), as the search of meaningful patterns in the data regarding the studied phenomenon is reflecting the theoretical framework established for this study. However, as Ryan and Bernard (2003, 93–94) point out, there needs to be a balance of not searching only what the researcher is looking for and still making justifiable theory-based connections between the data and research questions.

Third phase, searching for themes, involves organization of the different codes identified in the previous stage. During this process the codes are analyzed in terms of their relationship to one another and how the codes can be combined to form different levels of themes. The relationship between the codes, between themes and different levels of themes is examined in this phase. In this phase, the

codes are categorized into themes, sub-themes and groups which do not necessarily belong to any of the emerging themes, without abandoning any. (Braun & Clarke 2003, 89–90.)

In the fourth phase, reviewing themes, the significance of each theme is evaluated with reflection to the data. In the process sub-themes and themes are combined, separated and new themes formed. In addition, some of the emerging themes might collapse at this stage if there is not enough evidence in the data to support it. This process involves two review processes: in the first phase the initial codes are examined in terms of the formed themes and in the second phase the themes are reflected in relation to the whole data. The patterns formed by the codes need to make sense within the themes and the themes need to be coherent, form an ‘accurate representation’, of the whole data set. (Braun & Clarke 2003, 90–91.)

The fifth and final phase, defining and naming themes, involves “finding the ‘essence’ of what each theme is about”. This includes determining what feature or characteristic of the data the theme captures. This stage is followed by detailed analysis of each theme that identifies both the ‘story’ of each theme and the overall ‘story’ of the data in relation to the research question. (Braun & Clarke 2003, 92–93.) This phase in the analysis sets the grounds for the narrative analysis that uses the identified overarching narratives of each theme and the overall narrative of the data to further examine the context and positional grounds for the identified narratives.

4.4.2. Producing the narratives

This stage of the analysis follows the guidelines of producing narratives by Polkinghorne (1995). In this methodological model, the analytical process organizes the data elements into coherent developmental account where the data is synthesized rather than separated into its constituent parts (Polkinghorne 1995, 15–16). Therefore, Polkinghorne (1995) defines the form of analysis as configurative narrative analysis which is adapted in this study. Here the analysis configures the previously identified themes into an explanation to the research question.

The configurative narrative analysis by Polkinghorne (1995) involves seven factors to be included for developing the narrative. I have adapted the guidelines to fit my research setting, while still maintaining the value and meaning of each factor that needs to be included in the analysis: 1) the cultural context in which the storied case study takes place; 2) the characteristics of the participants

of the podcasts; 3) the relationships between the participants and with the context; 4) interaction of the participants and the context (including aims and goals); 5) the historical perspective and past experiences of the participants; 6) the outcome needs to be a story; 7) the product needs to be understandable and meaningful story. Here the context refers both to the institution of African Peacebuilding Network of the Social Science Research Council where the interviews take place and the peacebuilding context in Africa. The last two factors are more criteria of the outcome rather than factors to be included in the analysis process.

The construction of the narratives follows loosely the above stated construction of narratives by Polkinghorne (1995). However, while the analysis phase of producing the narratives has adopted the phases as a tool to produce the overarching narrative out of the identified themes from the data, the narratives that are produced are not presented in a story like form. On the contrary, they are presented as the compact summary of the thematic dimensions which construct them and named by specific terms to grasp the overarching meaning and content of each narrative. The choice of narrative analysis and the inclusion of thematic analysis to the process includes method specific limitations regardless of the previously discussed advantages. The researcher’s positionality and the associated scope and limitations of the chosen methodology and are discussed below.