100
Key Readings
Bryman, A. (2001) Social Research
Methods. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
*Frey, J.H. and Fontana, A. (1991) ‘The group interview in social research’,
Social Science Journal, 28: 175–187.
Morgan, D.L. (1997) Focus Groups as
Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
Phoenix, A., Frosh, S. and Pattman, R. (2003) ‘Producing contradictory masculine subject positions: narrative of threat, homophobia and bullying in 11–14 year old boys’, Journal of
I
Indexing
Definition
Indexing (or coding) is the activity where a researcher applies meaning to raw data by assigning key words or phrases. These key words then act as signposts to themes within the data. Indexing is an activity by which data is broken down, conceptualized and then re-formulated. The term indexing is distinctly different from the use of the term index within quantitative research which refers to the combining of a number of variables into a single composite mea- sure or index. Although the terms ‘coding’ and ‘indexing’ are often used inter- changeably, strictly speaking coding refers to the allocation of an exclusive code to a particular section of fieldnotes or interview transcript, while index- ing allows the same piece of text to be allocated multiple codes, just as in a book index where a single page can be indexed to refer to a number of different and overlapping index items.
Distinctive Features
A number of qualitative methods textbooks have discussed the process of indexing (see for example Dey, 1993; Lofland and Lofland, 1995; Miles and Huberman, 1994). The first stage of data analysis typically involves familiar- ization with the data through a series of re-readings in order to obtain a gen- eral sense of their meaning. The familiarization (or data immersion) is usually carried out on a small section of the full data set, for example maybe a hand- ful of interview transcripts. At this point the analyst may be writing notes on the types of topics contained within the data. A thematic framework is then developed according to the key research objectives and emergent themes, with similar topics clustered together. Sections of data are then indexed according to the framework, with coding categories refined appropriately in response to the data. Essentially the process relies on the researcher’s common-sense interpre- tations of the meaning of different segments of data. The process may be conducted by hand (in which case abbreviated codes may be written in the margins or coloured pens may indicate the allocation of different codes) or through the use of computer-assisted analysis. Either way, the aim is to have sections of data with multiple codes and for the process to be as inclusive as
possible, codes being added to reflect all kinds of nuances in the data rather than trying to fit the data into a few core codes.
Although qualitative researchers are encouraged to index their data on the basis of what the data themselves are able to yield, some writers (see for example Bogdan and Biklen, 1982) have provided novice researchers with suggestions for possible types of codes, such as ‘perspectives held by respondents’, ‘activity’ codes, and ‘relationship and social structure’ codes. Contextual codes are also often used to indicate the basic socio-demographic characteristics of the respondent(s), such as their gender, age group and so on. Index headings are essentially labels which serve to summarize the meaning of a topic into a key word or phrase. These headings may be formed on the basis of the actual lan- guage of the respondent. The index headings can then be supplemented by a longer description (or memo) of the meaning of the index term.
Strauss and Corbin (1990) have suggested an approach to data analysis which is associated with grounded theory. The first stage is open coding (or indexing) whereby the researcher scrutinizes data and breaks them down into thematic categories. This may be followed by axial and selective coding which involves the researcher examining each code in turn to explore its nature through a process of constant comparison of data held within each code and comparing it to other categories. The process of coding therefore involves multiple waves of coding whereby each cycle of coding represents a more satis- factory synthesis of earlier codes.
Examples
Frankland and Bloor (1999) demonstrate the process of indexing for a section of data derived from a focus group with schoolchildren on quitting smoking. Initially they develop broad themes that arise in the data, for example ‘peer pressure’, into which large amounts of text are indexed. The process is then refined with narrower sub-themes identified such as ‘bullying’ and ‘exclusion from groups’. The authors illustrate how sections of text can be multiply indexed.
Evaluation
The reliability with which indexing is consistently applied both by the same researcher and between researchers is often raised as a concern. Reliability of indexing can be improved through the rigorous comparison of the same data indexed separately by multiple researchers (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982). This strategy requires analysts to demonstrate consistency in their coding and allows them to resolve inter-coder ambiguities through discussion.
The steps of data coding outlined by Strauss and Corbin (1990) have appeal to those researchers and research funders who desire scientific rigour. If research reports contain accounts of indexing and coding schemes with illus- trative examples for each code, some readers may be more willing to believe that a logical and systematic approach to analysis has been taken.
However, Coffey et al. (1996) are critical of the narrow, reductionist analytic strategy that is imposed when coding is used as a first step to theory generation. Their concerns are heightened if analysis is conducted with computer-assisted qualitative data analysis as, it is argued, this encourages standardized, mech- anistic procedures which fragment and decontextualise data into discrete sec- tions. This objection to coding has far less force if the data analysis is an indexing process, allowing the same piece of data to represent a range of index items. They also argue that, if done badly, researchers often merely index according to the respondent’s common-sense categories and neglect to develop their own insights and theories.
Seale (1999) argues that indexing is an attempt to fix meaning on to the world, and that while this process excludes other viewpoints, this exclusivity is required in order to persuade audiences of the validity of the research. An issue remains, however, if coding fixes meanings too prematurely during the process of analysis thereby preventing the analyst from seeing beyond his or her initial ideas. Seale therefore argues that indexing should be seen as an early stage within the process of coding and represents an initial signposting of data to aid developmental thinking rather than representing final theories.