Concept analysis: Some limitations and possible solutions
A Botes, Professor, Department of Nursing, Rand Afrikaans University
Abstract
Concepts are the basic building blocks of scientific know l
edge or theoretical fram ew orks for any discipline. The strength of the theories that guide a discipline is depend
ent on the quality o f the concept analysis. Thus, the utili
sation o f poorly understood concepts in research and theory developm ent will result in questionable reliability and validity.
C oncept analysis is associated with the research design of philosophical inquiry. The purpose of philosophical in
quiry is to perform research using intellectual analysis to clarify meaning. Traditionally, no em pirical (qualitative or quantitative) investigations were used to clarify the m eaning o f concepts. The lack o f empirical investigation to clarify concepts, results in certain lim itations in the m ethodology o f concept analysis.
It seem s that m ethodological innovations for enhancing concept analysis is urgently required. The purpose o f this article is to describe the utilisation of qualitative and quan
titative strategies w ith literature review in concept analy
sis as a possible solution to limitations.
This article will firstly, describe the lim itations in the tra
ditional W ilsonian m ethods o f concept analysis and will secondly dem onstrate how the introduction o f qualitative and quantitative m ethods with literature review can over
com e some o f the limitations. An example a research study on quality o f life (Ferrans, 1997:110) will be used to dem onstrate how qualitative and quantitative em pirical m eth
ods with literature review can enhance the quality o f con
cept analysis.
Opsomming
K onsepte is die boustene van w etenskaplike kennis of teoretiese raamwerke van ‘n dissipline. D ie gehalte van die teorieë van die dissipline is afhanklik van die gehalte van konsepanalise. Dus, sal die gebruik van onduidelike konsepte in navorsing en teorieontwikkeling die geldigheid en b etro u b aarh eid van sodanige n avorsing o f teorieë beïnvloed.
K o n sep an alise w ord m et die n a v o rsin g so n tw erp van filosofiese ondersoek geassosieer. Die doel van filosofiese ondersoeke is om die betekenis aan verskynsels, by wyse van ‘n intellektuele ondersoek, te verleen. Tradisioneel was geen empiriese ondersoek (kw alitatief of kwantitatief) gebruik om betekenis van konsepte te analiseer nie. Die g e b re k aan e m p irie s e o n d e rs o e k m e to d e s in d ie ontw ikkeling van konsepte lei tot sekere beperkings in die m etodologie van konsepanalise.
Dit wil dus voorkom dat ‘n vem uwing in die metodologiese b en ad erin g van k o n sep an alise n o o d sa a k lik is. A s ‘n m oontlike oplossing vir die beperkings in die metodologie van konsepanalise is dit die doel van die artikel is om die g ebruik van kw alitatiew e en kw antitatiew e strategies, bykom end tot die tradisionele literatuurondersoek, voor te stel.
H ierdie artikel sal eerstens die beperkings in W ilson- gebaseerde metodes beskryf en tweedens dem onstreer hoe k o n s e p a n a lis e , by w y se v an ‘n k o m b in a s ie van k w a lita tie w e en k w a n tita tie w e m e to d e s saam m et literatuurstudie die beperkings kan oorkom . ‘n Voorbeeld van ‘n navorsingsprojek oor “kw aliteit van lew e” (Ferrans, 1997:110) sal gebruik word om te dem onstreer hoe die gebruik van kw alitatiew e en kw antitatiew e m etodes in kom binasie m et literatuurstudies gebruik kan word om die gehalte van konsepanalise te bevorder.
Introduction
R esearchers investigate a phenom enon with the intention of understanding it or to give m eaning to the phenom enon. C on
cepts as lingual constructions are the m ost elem entary sym bolic construction by which people classify or categorise re
ality. C oncepts are the carriers o f meaning. One could say that concepts are the symbolic constructions or tools by means o f w hich people make sense o f and attribute m eaning to their worlds (M outon, 1996:181)
We distinguish betw een two types o f meanings, nam ely con-
notative and denotative meanings o f concepts. Connotative m eaning refers to the sense or the attributes o f concepts. The essential attributes or connotations are necessary to give a theoretical definition o f a concept. We also distinguish be
tw een two further uses o f connotations, nam ely subjective and conventional connotations.
The subjective connotation is the m eaning that individuals attach to a w ord and is closely associated with the individu
a l’s particular m indset and experiences. The conventional connotation is the assumed or accepted m eaning of the con
cept that has implicitly been agreed upon for the sake o f com
23
m unication. This im plies that researchers w ithin the same discipline and more specific in the same paradigm tend to share specific conventional connotations (Copi & Cohen, 1994: 181-191; Mouton, 1996: 182).
The denotative m eaning o f a concept refers to the reference or the em pirical indicators of the concept. The denotations o f the concepts are needed to give an operational definition of the concept and to develop an instrum ent to measure the con
cepts in reality.
The whole process o f unfolding, exploring and understand
ing concepts is called concept analysis. The purpose of con
cept analysis is to give m eaning, develop, delineate, com pare, classify, correct, refine and validate concepts as well as to develop measuring instruments.
Concepts are the basic building blocks o f scientific know l
edge or theoretical frameworks for any discipline. The strength o f the theories that guide a discipline is dependent on the quality of the concept analysis. Thus, the utilisation of poorly understood concepts in research and theory developm ent will result in questionable reliability and validity o f the results.
Concept analysis is associated with the research design of philosophical inquiry. The purpose of philosophical inquiry is to perform research using intellectual analysis to clarify m eaning (B um s & Grove, 1993:79). Traditionally, no em pirical (qualitative or quantitative) investigations were used to clarify the m eaning of concepts. The lack o f em pirical in
vestigation to clarify concepts, results in certain lim itations in the m ethodology o f concept analysis.
It seems that m ethodological innovations for enhancing con
cept analysis is urgently required. The purpose of this article is to describe the utilisation o f qualitative and quantitative strategies with literature reviews in concept analysis as a pos
sible solution to limitations.
This article will firstly, describe the limitations in the tradi
tional W ilsonian methods (1963/1987) of concept analysis and will secondly dem onstrate how the introduction o f quali
tative and quantitative m ethods in com bination with litera
ture reviews can overcome some of the limitations. An exam ple a research study on quality o f life (Ferrans, 1997:110) will be used to dem onstrate how quantitative and quantita
tive em pirical methods in com bination with literature review can enhance the quality of concept analysis.
Before describing the lim itations in and possible solution for in concept analysis it is im portant to address the standards for quality concept analysis.
Standards for conceptual analysis
Ideally, concepts used in disciplines should be mature. M a
ture concepts are well defined with characteristics/attributes, the boundaries demarcated, the preconditions specified and
the o u tco m es described. The fo llo w in g p rin cip les (G ift, 1997:76) could be used as standards/criteria to evaluate the quality o f a concept analysis, namely:
• Concepts are clear and distinct, that is, clearly defined and well differentiated from other concepts (epistem o- logical principle).
• C oncepts are coherently and system atically related to other concepts (logical principle).
• Concepts are applicable to the world or operationalised (pragm atic principle).
• C oncepts are appropriate to their use in context (lin
guistic principle).
Lim itations of the W ilsonian methods
In the 1960’s W ilson (1963/1987) published a detail approach to concept analysis, describing m ethods to guide the process o f concept analysis. W ilson’s work has been extrem ely influ
ential and form s the basis of concept developm ent for many disciplines. The approach o f Wilson can be briefly described as follows:
• Isolate the conceptual questions from other questions.
• Q uestions o f concepts are about meaning. The ana
lyst should ask, w hat criteria are being used to deter
mine the m eaning of the concept. If a research ques
tion contains m ore than one concept, the individual concepts should be isolated and addressed.
• Develop “right answ ers” as concepts m ay have m ulti
ple meanings and multiple contexts. Researchers m ust identify the prim ary uses that are at the “heart” o f the concept. This requires the analyst to determ ine which elem ents are essential to the core m eaning o f the con
cept and which is not applicable.
• Apply the following techniques in identifying the m eaning o f the concept by constructing cases from everyday experiences:
• M odel cases should refer to exam ples from real life, which is a true reflection o f the concept.
• Related cases should refer to other concepts, which are related to the concept under investigation.
• Borderline cases should refer to those cases w here un certainty exists. For example: A boy is warned about electric wires. If the boy touches the electric wire and gets shocked is this “punishm ent?”
• Invented cases should be used where our ordinary ex
periences does not provide us w ith instances to clarify the concept.
• Explore the social context, nature or circum stances o f the concept by asking who might use the concept, when, why and how. By doing this, the analyst stays sensi
tive to the cultural and social milieu in which the con
cept under study is used.
• Investigate the underlying anxiety/em otive context o f the concept. W ilson suggests that to determ ine the feel
ings, the tone and im portant insights about the con
cept, that the analyst should ask questions such as: Is there a debate about the concept?
24
process or event the researcher wants to investigate. One can study individuals, groups, organisations/institutions, cultural objects, social actions and interventions. The point o f focus when studying these units o f analysis can be their character
istics, orientation or actions. The point of focus, namely the characteristics, orientation and actions can be the appropri
ate concept to be analysis.
In a study on the quality ó f life (QOL) the individual could be identified, as the unit o f analysis and the point of focus is quality o f life. QOL has become a critically important con
cept in health care. Quality o f life considerations are signifi
cant during end o f life decisions. Indicators (denotations) of the concept QOL are used to evaluate treatm ent in terms of cost and benefits. The quality o f health care can be evaluated using the indicators o f QOL. For these reasons quality o f life seemed to be the appropriate concept that needs some clarifi
cation. The next step is to determ ine the purpose of the analy
sis.
Determine the purpose of the concept analysis
This step helps to focus the attention of the researcher on exactly why is s/he doing the concept analysis. The purpose may be to clarify the m eaning o f an existing concept, to de
velop a theory or to develop an operational definition and a m easuring instrum ent.
In the ex am ple o f the study on q u a lity o f life (F errans, 1997:110) the purpose o f the study was to develop a concep
tual fram ew ork on which an instrument to measure Q O L could be based.
Development of the concept
Ferrans (1997:110) began the research on quality o f life in 1982. The research was conducted in different phases. Each of these phases will be discussed.
Phase 1 Literature review Phase 2 Qualitative study Phase 3 Literature review Phase 4 Quantitative study Phase 5 Literature review Phase 6 Qualitative research
Phase 1 : Literature review
To form ulate m eta-theoretical/theoretical assum ptions may not be relevant for all concept analyses. In the case o f the study o f Q O L it is how ever im portant to determ ine the point of departure. The researcher chose an individualistic philo
sophical viewpoint, in which individuals personally defined what QOL m eant for them. The individualistic viewpoint rec
ognises that different people value different things. In the study o f QOL the perspectives o f Cam pbell, Converse and Rogers (1976) were used as theoretical departure. It was argued from this perception that QO L relates to in the experience of life.
QOL, namely:
• The ability to live a normal life.
• A bility to live socially useful (social utility).
• Natural capacity (physical and m ental capacity)
• A chievem ent o f personal goals.
• Happiness/affects.
• Satisfaction with life.
A fter clarifying/analysing each of the six attributes/connota
tion individually the researcher came to a conclusion that the connotation, “satisfaction with life” is the best fit to concep
tualise QOL. From phase one a theoretical definition o f QO L was form ulated, namely:
QOL is a person’s sense o f well-being that stems from satis
faction or dissatisfaction with the areas o f life that are im por
tant for him/her.
Phase 2 : Qualitative research
In phase two o f the concept analysis o f quality o f life, the researcher (Ferrans, 1997:110) used a qualitative approach.
The researcher (Ferrans, 1997:110) interview ed 40 haem odi- alysis patients to determ ine the com ponents o f a satisfying life. Patients were asked to characterise the best and w orst possible lives they could imagine in open-ended questions.
Data were coded in terms o f elem ents o f life that were m en
tioned using inductive coding techniques o f Glaser and Strauss (1967). Twenty-two aspects o f life were identified through the discussion o f the best possible and eighteen were identi
fied through the worst. The findings were compared with other sim ilar studies in phase 3.
Phase 3: Literature review
The researcher (Ferrans, 1997:110) conducted an extensive literature review. M ore than 400 studies, assessing life satis
faction, were listed. Based on the literature review, a list of dim ensions to assess QOL was developed. The data from the original qualitative analysis (phase 2) and from the literature review were integrated to produce a list o f 32 elem ents of QOL that represented QOL o f the general population. Three additional elements were identified from the data o f the di
alysis patients.
These 35 elem ents were used as the basis for the developm ent of the Ferrans and Powers (1992) QOL index. Each elem ent was used to develop two items, one to assess the satisfaction with the elem ent and one to assess the im portance of the ele
ment.
The results o f the literature review revealed six meanings of
Phase 4 : Quantitative research
The next task in the concept explication was to cluster re
lated elem ents together into dom ains o f QOL. The research
ers (Ferrans, 1997:110) used exploratory factor analysis in phase four to determ ine the nature and num ber o f the do
mains. The QOL index was used to collect data from 349 haem odialysis patients that were random ly draw n from the haem odialysis patients in Illinois. The results revealed that four factors fit the data the best, which represent the four 26
♦
♦
♦
♦
Test the practical significance o f the concept by creat
ing questions o f the concept that have definite yes/no answers.
Choose the m eaning o f the concept that represents the m ost useful m eaning o f the concept to generate practi
cal results.
Conduct an internal dialogue about the concept.
Re-analyse the conceptual questions for relevancy.
Com pare the results.
Define the concept.
The methods o f W ilson (1963/1987) are based on a philo
sophical design, a literature study and intellectual analysis w ithout em pirical (qualitative or quantitative) m ethods. The absence o f em pirical m ethods contributes partly to the lim ita
tions in the results o f concept analysis by Wilson-derived meth
ods. The limitations in the W ilsonian methods are echoed by G ift (1997: 17/24) in the following statements:
An incom plete and vague description o f the applica
tion o f the m ethods is provided.
Lack o f clarity about the suitable concept for the analy
sis and how it was chosen, exists.
Failure to integrate the steps and the application o f the methods in a cookbook or stepwise procedure is evident.
Lack o f rigor is perceived.
The results o f the analysis remains insignificance and without substance. It lacks com prehensiveness, ex
ploratory pow er and is superficial. The m ethods tend to provide a list o f attributes (connotations) o f the con
cept only, w ithout a clear understanding o f the phe
nom enon.
Limitations in the utilisation o f a model and other cases to identify/verify the essential attributes of a concept are evident.
A fter a critical analysis of the results from the W ilsonian- derived m ethods, M orse and other authors (Gift, 1997:92) did not recom m end the continued use o f W ilsonian-derived m ethods for concept analysis and developm ent. It is apparent that the m ajor problem with the W ilsonian-derived methods is the absence o f em pirical m ethods that could provide trian
gulation and rigor to the analysis o f concepts.
Possible solutions to the limitations
To overcom e the lim itations o f the W ilsonian m ethods, lit
erature combined with quantitative and qualitative approaches can be em ployed in conducting a concept analysis. This arti
cle doesn’t condem n the traditional W ilson-derived m ethods but does rather propose the com bination of qualitative and quantitative approaches with literature studies and intellec
tual analysis to overcom e the various limitations.
A basic rule of science, namely to integrate a inquiry/study w ithin existing know ledge fram eworks is also applicable to concept analysis. To explore existing literature for the m ean
ing o f a concept should be one o f the methods in the process o f a concept analysis. Literature can also be used to verify the m eanings/the uses/the boundaries/the preconditions/the out
comes o f the concept.
Qualitative methods differ m arkedly from traditional quanti
tative approaches in that they require the collection o f spe
cific data from participants and the inductive analysis o f that data. The decision o f which qualitative m ethod to use de
pends in part on the purpose o f the conceptual inquiry. P he
nom enological methods are well suited for concept identifi
cation and concept analysis. Ethnographical studies are help
ful to elicit cognitive categories and to develop concepts from the perspectives of informants. Unstructured interviews are analysed to identify the concept o f significance. Using a se
mantic technique, for exam ple sentence com pletion, assists to identify the characteristics o f concepts. The boundaries of the concept can be identified by using q-sorts or card sorts.
Grounded theory is particularly useful in concept analysis. A com bination o f two qualitative m ethods can be used to obtain the m ost com prehensive picture o f the phenom enon (Gift, 1997:80).
Q uantitative approaches to concept analysis are generally brought into play only after considerable prelim inary work has been done to clarify the concept. Once the research has clearly described internal characteristics o f the concept and provided a well-defined theoretical definition, the next step is to employ quantitative m ethods to validate and refine the concept with a strong em phasis on the epistem ological and pragm atic principle. Often a conceptual m ap/m odel is pro
duced and then subjected to deductive quantitative testing.
Q uantitative techniques like factor analysis, correlations, re
gression analysis, discrim inant analysis and a C hronbach’s A lpha could be used to enhance validity and reliability of the results (Gift, 1997:86).
The methodology where literature in com bination with quali
tative and quantitative approaches is em ployed will be dem onstrated by using an exam ple o f a com pleted research project on Quality o f life by Ferrans (1997:110).
Demonstration of the combined research methodologies
Concept analysis is a skill and a list o f m ethods/techniques cannot fully describe a skill. By using the various research m ethods/techniques in a creative way the researcher can de
velop her/his own individual approach in applying the tech
niques and m ethods (Rossouw, 2000:27). The folowing is an exam ple o f the process o f concept analysis as outlined by Ferrans (1997:110) consisting o f the follow ing steps/tech
niques, namely:
• Select a concept
• Determ ine the purpose o f the concept analysis
• Develop the concept by using different approaches and methods.
Select a concept
The concept to be analysed is norm ally one o f the key con
cepts in a research project. It is related to the unit o f analysis.
U nit o f analysis refers to w hat object, phenom enon, entity, 25
interrelated domains o f QOL, namely
• Health and functioning
• Psychological/spiritual
• Social and econom ic
• Family
H igher order factor analysis perform ed on the factors dem on
strated that the overall construct o f the elem ents was “life satisfaction”.
M O U T O N , J 1996: U nderstanding social research. Preto
ria: Van Schaik
R O SSO U W , D 2000: Intellectual tools. M idrand: Amabuku
W IL S O N , J 1963/1987: Thinking with concepts. Cambridge:
Cam bridge University Press.
Phase 5 Literature review
Again literature review was conducted to validate the con
ceptual fram ework from the previous phases.
Phase 6 Qualitative research
To confirm the generalisation of the fram ew ork to other cul
tures another qualitative research was conducted and m ajor differences were reported.
Conclusion
The researchers in the study o f QOL did not use a W ilson- based m ethod for concept analysis. They used a com bination o f qualitative and quantitative approached w ith literature re
view to develop a conceptual framework for QOL. This fram e
w ork provided the basis for the developm ent o f the Ferrans and Pow er (1992) QO L Index. Health professionals are using this instrum ent in research and clinical practice in 18 coun
tries. It was translated into 9 languages. The concept analysis by using a com bination of methods contributed to a better understanding o f the im pact of illness and treatm ent on QOL.
By adding qualitative and quantitative approaches w ith lit
erature review m ost o f the limitations of the W ilson-based m ethods can be overcome.
References
B U R N S, N & G R O V E , S K 1993: The practice o f nursing research. London: WB Saunders.
C O P I, IM & C O H E N , C 1994: Introduction to Logic. N inth Edition. N ew York. M acm illan Publishing Com pany
F E R R A N S , C 1997: On G IF T , A G 1997: Clarifying C on
cepts in Nursing Research. Chapter 6. New York: Springer Publishing Company).
F E R R A N S , C & P O W E R S , M 1992: Psychom etric assess
ment o f Quality of Life Index. Research in Nursing and H ealth.
15: 29-38.
G IF T , A G 1997: Clarifying Concepts in N ursing Research.
N ew York. Springer Publishing Company.
G L A S E R , B & S T R A U S S , A 1967: T he d isc o v e ry of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago:
Aldine.
2 7
