Content analysis: What are they talking about?
Content analysis: What are they talking about?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.002
复制
发表时间：
2006-01-01
影响因子：
12
通讯作者：
Jochems, WMG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Strijbos, JW;Martens, RL;Jochems, WMG
在计算机支持的协作学习中，定量内容分析越来越多地用于超越表面水平分析（例如，计数信息），但一般没有报告对公认做法的批评性反思。对CSCL会议记录的回顾揭示了分析单位定义的普遍错误。总的来说，选择一个单位的理由不足，在制定内容分析程序时所作的决定也不明确。本文将说明，目前公认的关于“意义单位”的做法并不普遍适用于电子通信的定量内容分析。这种分析受到“单元边界重叠”和与所使用的技术有关的上下文限制的影响。对电子邮件通信的分析需要不同的分析单元和分段程序。这个程序被证明是可靠的，和随后的编码，这些单位的定量分析产生了令人满意的可靠性。这些发现对当前CSCL研究中的内容分析实践具有启示和建议。(c)2005爱思唯尔有限公司保留所有权利。
Quantitative content analysis is increasingly used to surpass surface level analyses in computer-supported collaborative learning (e.g., counting messages), but critical reflection on accepted practice has generally not been reported. A review of CSCL conference proceedings revealed a general vagueness in definitions of units of analysis. In general, arguments for choosing a unit were lacking and decisions made while developing the content analysis procedures were not made explicit. In this article, it will be illustrated that the currently accepted practices concerning the 'unit of meaning' are not generally applicable to quantitative content analysis of electronic communication. Such analysis is affected by 'unit boundary overlap' and contextual constraints having to do with the technology used. The analysis of e-mail communication required a different unit of analysis and segmentation procedure. This procedure proved to be reliable, and the subsequent coding of these units for quantitative analysis yielded satisfactory reliabilities. These findings have implications and recommendations for current content analysis practice in CSCL research. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.