Generation of initial codes

In qualitative research data analysis is a search for patterns but also for ideas that provide assistance towards the explanation for the existence of those patterns (Bernard 2006). An initial step towards this goal, is coding. Coding has been defined as a method for organizing and

grouping “similarly coded data into categories or “families” because they share some characteristic – the beginning of a pattern” (Saldaña 2009, p.8). A code has been defined as:

“A word or phrase that symbolically assigns a summative, salient, essence-capturing, and/or evocative attribute for a portion of language-based or visual data” (Saldaña 2009, p.3).

Although a number of scholars use the terms code and category interchangeably, this study adopts Saldaña’s (2009) view that codes facilitate the development of categories: Based on their similarity and regularity, that is by identifying a pattern, codes, are grouped together into categories (Figure 4.5) that is “a word or phrase describing some segment of your data that is explicit” (Rossman and Rallis 2003, p.282).

Figure 4.5: A streamlined codes-to-theory model for qualitative inquiry

Source: Saldaña (2009)

Although there are numerous methods of coding (Miles and Huberman 1994; Saldaña 2009), none of the methods claims hegemony over the others. More than that, from a pragmatist’s perspective Saldaña (2009) not only suggests using the right tool for the right job, but also prompts researchers to adapt any method to fit specific analysis needs.

Although coding requires the researcher to “wear” an analytic lens, it is the lens’ filter that each researcher uses that influences how data are perceived and interpreted (Saldaña 2009). In this research I feel the need to state that my filter, therefore the way I perceive and interpret data, is influenced by my marketing education and professional background and also by my pragmatic worldview.

Coding is seen as a two cycle process. During the first coding cycle, initial coding was necessary to enable better data management to facilitate further data analysis. Two types of coding methods were employed during initial coding: attribute coding and structural coding.

After that, the first cycle coding continued with descriptive coding, and provisional coding. The second coding cycle was conducted with pattern coding. More specifically:

Attribute coding, or otherwise stated as descriptive coding (Miles and Huberman 1994), refers to the logging of participants or other essential information for the purposes of future management and reference (Saldaña 2009). In this study, attribute coding was used to code information such as focus group session, participants’ gender, age, nationality, profession, total number of types of social media use, and use or no use of each specific type of social media were coded. Given the objectives of the study there was no need to make cross-group comparisons, or examine differences between subgroups based on different gender, age, or other characteristics. Therefore most of the attribute codes did not directly contribute to data analysis.

However, attribute codes provided a better understanding of each data extract since they provided a number of insights for the participant with whom the specific extract was associated with.

Structural coding serves the purpose of categorizing the corpus of data into segments representing broad topics relating to research questions so that each segment forms the basis of further analysis within or across topics (MacQueen et al. 2008; Saldaña 2009). In this study, structural coding was used to categorize the data in segments such as: Dreaming, before trip, during trip, after trip, so that to further facilitate the analysis. As a result of structural coding, nine additional sheets were created in the Excel data management file: One for each of the four stages of the travel process, and one for each of the five sentence completion tasks.

Conversations from each of the seven FG were copied and pasted into the new sheets. This was done so that relevant parts from all seven discussions were grouped into one sheet to enable further study and coding.

The researcher then focused on each of the above nine sheets in his effort to gain an understanding of how each discussion topic was treated throughout the focus groups, that is how

social media are used and their impacts in each of the four stages of the travel process. The first cycle coding continued with descriptive coding, and provisional coding for the data contained in each of the nine sheets:

Descriptive coding was applied within each of the segments previously generated through structural coding. Descriptive coding assigns a word or short phrase to identify the topic of a passage of qualitative data and is considered a prerequisite for Second Cycle coding (Wolcott 1994; Saldaña 2009). For some descriptive codes more detailed subcodes were created (Miles and Huberman 1994).

Provisional coding applies to the data a predefined list of codes that can be based on literature review, the conceptual framework, the research questions, or even the researcher’s previous experience and knowledge (Miles and Huberman 1994; Saldaña 2009). In the present study, one of the research questions is related to how social media are used throughout the stages of the decision making process. In examining this research question, provisional codes such as need identification, information search, evaluation of alternatives, purchase, consumption, and post-consumption evaluation were developed to code instances of social media use. Adequate caution was exercised to allow openness for new ideas beyond the predefined list (Saldaña 2009). In practice, this is evidenced by the fact that despite the provisional coding as per the decision making process stages, other uses of social media have been identified outside the decision making process.

The second coding cycle was conducted with pattern coding: Pattern coding is a method used in second cycle coding and is appropriate for the generation of major themes and the creation of theoretical constructs (Saldaña 2009). Miles and Huberman (1994) describe pattern codes as explanatory or inferential, identifying emergent themes or explanations, but also as meta-codes that bring meaning to data. In the present study, after the development of codes during the first cycle, data were sorted so to group together similarly coded passages. First cycle codes were then extensively reviewed to assess meaning and commonality. A pattern code, in the form of a short phrase, was then assigned to those with similar meaning. Thereafter, pattern codes were used as stimuli for the development of statements describing major themes, patterns of actions or constructs (Saldaña 2009).