Electronic Letters to:
|
|
E-letters: Electronic letters published:
-
![[Read eLetter]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
Transcription of Qualitative Research Data
- Christian T. K.-H. Stadtländer (30 June 2008)
|
|
|||
|
Christian T. K.-H. Stadtländer, Biologist, Microbiologist, and Epidemiologist University of St. Thomas, College of Applied Professional Studies, Minneapolis, MN 55403, USA
Send e-letter to journal:
|
Julia Bailey’s article on transcription of qualitative research data caught my attention because she gives the reader valuable advice regarding the theoretical and practical decisions involved in the process of transcription. For example, she emphasized the importance of focusing on the aim of the research project, on proper reduction of original data, on capturing the meaning of verbal and non-verbal interaction, and on the influence of the researcher’s interpretation of raw data on the outcome of the study (1). Transcription is indeed a crucial process in any qualitative research project as it is the first step in the analysis of raw data. I agree with Bailey that investigators should be very careful with handling this process. I would like to add a few thoughts about the transcription process by reviewing some additional literature sources and by adding a few of my own experiences. Marshall and Rossman (2) pointed out that we do not speak in paragraphs and do not give signals to researchers about punctuation during a conversation. Thus, transcribing qualitative data is challenging because the transcriber makes judgments and shapes the meaning of the written words. Sofaer (3) emphasized that the analysis and interpretation process should be deliberate and thorough in order to avoid the use of initial impressions. Bradley and Curry (4) discussed the importance of formatting and suggest the labeling of transcripts with a systematic file name and inserting line-numbering so that communication among members of the analysis team is easier, particularly when certain sections of an interview are being discussed later. They also suggest that once a transcript has been prepared, it should be read closely to gain a general understanding of the data. I found it personally quite helpful to read out loud my self-prepared transcripts for several times, which significantly improved my understanding of the qualitative data and also facilitated the subsequent development of coding categories. Lichtman (5) discussed the issue of transcribing research data collected from a focus group interview with many people (e.g., 10 different voices). She pointed to the difficulty in transcribing those raw data because some people may speak at the same time, some may interrupt, and others may be talking so quietly that it is difficult to understand them. A solution to this problem is to listen and then extract themes rather than to attempt distinguishing one voice from another. I believe this is a good idea. Transcribing recorded qualitative data is time-consuming and can be quite costly. Most literature sources I read indicate that self- transcribing original data has advantages over hiring a professional transcriber. However, this may not always be possible, particularly when large data sets need to be processed. Seidman (6) pointed out that an advantage of transcribing own tapes is that the investigator comes to know his/her interviews better. In case someone else is hired to transcribe the raw data, Bogdan and Biklen (7) suggest that the investigator should work closely together with the transcriber in order to make sure that the transcription is accurate. More specifically, when a professional transcriber is hired, the investigator should have prepared detailed written instructions for this person. As Seidman (6) puts it: “Writing out the instructions will improve the consistency of the process, encourage the researchers to think through all that is involved, and allow them to share their decision making with their readers at a later point.” Another important issue relates to the length of the transcripts. Should everything be transcribed or only certain sections of it? Seidman (6) does not recommend preselecting particular parts of the tape for transcription and omitting others because this could lead to premature judgments about what is important and what is not. I have tried out both ways and came to the same conclusion. The term “transcription” is well known in biology. In this scientific discipline, it relates to “gene-transcription,” a process that can be defined as using the DNA as a template in order to make RNA strands (the transcripts) from it (8). If the genes encoded in the DNA are not accurately transcribed, the deciphering of the transcripts will be difficult and may result in improper protein synthesis. This, in turn, can significantly impact cellular functions. I suggest that we recognize the significance of “accurate gene transcription” in biology and adopt it to the field of qualitative research. Accurate “qualitative data transcription” will allow us to obtain a readable text that has important meaning and can help us solve complex social phenomena, including those related to medicine, public health, and education. References 1. Bailey J. First steps in qualitative data analysis: transcribing. Fam Pract. 2008; 25: 127-131. 2. Marshall C, Rossman GB. Designing Qualitative Research. 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2006. 3. Sofaer S. Qualitative research methods. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002; 14: 329-336. 4. Bradley EH, Curry LA. Codes to theory: a critical stage in qualitative analysis. In: Curry L, Shield R, Wetle T (eds.). Improving Aging and Public Health Research: Qualitative and Mixed Methods. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association, 2006: 91-102. 5. Lichtman M. Qualitative Research in Education: A User’s Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2006. 6. Seidman I. Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. 3rd edn. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, 2006. 7. Bogdan RC, Biklen SK. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods. 5th edn. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, 2007. 8. Starr C. Basic Concepts in Biology. 6th edn. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brook/Cole, 2006. Conflict of Interest:None declared |
|||