unit of analysis in qualitative research pdf

Research Design Review

A discussion of qualitative & quantitative research design, qualitative data analysis: the unit of analysis.

As discussed in two earlier articles in Research Design Review (see “The Important Role of ‘Buckets’ in Qualitative Data Analysis” and “Finding Connections & Making Sense of Qualitative Data” ), the selection of the unit of analysis is one of the first steps in the qualitative data analysis process. The “unit of analysis” refers to the portion of content that will be the basis for decisions made during the development of codes. For example, in textual content analyses, the unit of analysis may be at the level of a word, a sentence (Milne & Adler, 1999), a paragraph, an article or chapter, an entire edition or volume, a complete response to an interview question, entire diaries from research participants, or some other level of text. The unit of analysis may not be defined by the content per se but rather by a characteristic of the content originator (e.g., person’s age), or the unit of analysis might be at the individual level with, for example, each participant in an in-depth interview (IDI) study treated as a case. Whatever the unit of analysis, the researcher will make coding decisions based on various elements of the content, including length, complexity, manifest meanings, and latent meanings based on such nebulous variables as the person’s tone or manner.

Deciding on the unit of analysis is a very important decision because it guides the development of codes as well as the coding process. If a weak unit of analysis is chosen, one of two outcomes may result: 1) If the unit chosen is too precise (i.e., at too much of a micro-level than what is actually needed), the researcher will set in motion an analysis that may miss important contextual information and may require more time and cost than if a broader unit of analysis had been chosen. An example of a too-precise unit of analysis might be small elements of content such as individual words. 2) If the unit chosen is too imprecise (i.e., at a very high macro-level), important connections and contextual meanings in the content at smaller (individual) units may be missed, leading to erroneous categorization and interpretation of the data. An example of a too-imprecise unit of analysis might be the entire set of diaries written by 25 participants in an IDI research study, or all the comments made by teenagers on an online support forum. Keep in mind, however, that what is deemed too precise or imprecise will vary across qualitative studies, making it difficult to prescribe the “right” solution for all situations.

Although there is no perfect prescription for every study, it is generally understood that researchers should strive for a unit of analysis that retains the context necessary to derive meaning from the data. For this reason, and if all other things are equal, the qualitative researcher should probably err on the side of using a broader, more contextually based unit of analysis rather than a narrowly focused level of analysis (e.g., sentences). This does not mean that supra-macro-level units, such as the entire set of transcripts from an IDI study, are appropriate; and, to the contrary, these very imprecise units, which will obscure meanings and nuances at the individual level, should be avoided. It does mean, however, that units of analysis defined as the entirety of a research interview or focus group discussion are more likely to provide the researcher with contextual entities by which reasonable and valid meanings can be obtained and analyzed across all cases.

In the end, the researcher needs to consider the particular circumstances of the study and define the unit of analysis keeping in mind that broad, contextually rich units of analysis — maintained throughout coding, category and theme development, and interpretation — are crucial to deriving meaning in qualitative data and ensuring the integrity of research outcomes.

Milne, M. J., & Adler, R. W. (1999). Exploring the reliability of social and environmental disclosures content analysis. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 12 (2), 237–256.

Image captured from: http://www.picklejarcommunications.com

Share this:

• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

Reblogged this on Evaluare și transformare – Adapting to change .

• Pingback: Qualitative Analysis: ‘Thick Meaning’ by Preserving Each Lived Experience | Research Design Review

Leave a comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 4: Measurement and Units of Analysis

4.4 Units of Analysis and Units of Observation

Another point to consider when designing a research project, and which might differ slightly in qualitative and quantitative studies, has to do with units of analysis and units of observation. These two items concern what you, the researcher, actually observe in the course of your data collection and what you hope to be able to say about those observations. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the differences between units of analysis and observation.

Unit of Analysis

A unit of analysis is the entity that you wish to be able to say something about at the end of your study, probably what you would consider to be the main focus of your study.

Unit of Observation

A unit of observation is the item (or items) that you actually observe, measure, or collect in the course of trying to learn something about your unit of analysis. In a given study, the unit of observation might be the same as the unit of analysis, but that is not always the case. Further, units of analysis are not required to be the same as units of observation. What is required, however, is for researchers to be clear about how they define their units of analysis and observation, both to themselves and to their audiences. More specifically, your unit of analysis will be determined by your research question. Your unit of observation, on the other hand, is determined largely by the method of data collection that you use to answer that research question.

To demonstrate these differences, let us look at the topic of students’ addictions to their cell phones. We will consider first how different kinds of research questions about this topic will yield different units of analysis. Then we will think about how those questions might be answered and with what kinds of data. This leads us to a variety of units of observation.

If I were to ask, “Which students are most likely to be addicted to their cell phones?” our unit of analysis would be the individual. We might mail a survey to students on a university or college campus, with the aim to classify individuals according to their membership in certain social classes and, in turn, to see how membership in those classes correlates with addiction to cell phones. For example, we might find that students studying media, males, and students with high socioeconomic status are all more likely than other students to become addicted to their cell phones. Alternatively, we could ask, “How do students’ cell phone addictions differ and how are they similar? In this case, we could conduct observations of addicted students and record when, where, why, and how they use their cell phones. In both cases, one using a survey and the other using observations, data are collected from individual students. Thus, the unit of observation in both examples is the individual. But the units of analysis differ in the two studies. In the first one, our aim is to describe the characteristics of individuals. We may then make generalizations about the populations to which these individuals belong, but our unit of analysis is still the individual. In the second study, we will observe individuals in order to describe some social phenomenon, in this case, types of cell phone addictions. Consequently, our unit of analysis would be the social phenomenon.

Another common unit of analysis in sociological inquiry is groups. Groups, of course, vary in size, and almost no group is too small or too large to be of interest to sociologists. Families, friendship groups, and street gangs make up some of the more common micro-level groups examined by sociologists. Employees in an organization, professionals in a particular domain (e.g., chefs, lawyers, sociologists), and members of clubs (e.g., Girl Guides, Rotary, Red Hat Society) are all meso-level groups that sociologists might study. Finally, at the macro level, sociologists sometimes examine citizens of entire nations or residents of different continents or other regions.

A study of student addictions to their cell phones at the group level might consider whether certain types of social clubs have more or fewer cell phone-addicted members than other sorts of clubs. Perhaps we would find that clubs that emphasize physical fitness, such as the rugby club and the scuba club, have fewer cell phone-addicted members than clubs that emphasize cerebral activity, such as the chess club and the sociology club. Our unit of analysis in this example is groups. If we had instead asked whether people who join cerebral clubs are more likely to be cell phone-addicted than those who join social clubs, then our unit of analysis would have been individuals. In either case, however, our unit of observation would be individuals.

Organizations are yet another potential unit of analysis that social scientists might wish to say something about. Organizations include entities like corporations, colleges and universities, and even night clubs. At the organization level, a study of students’ cell phone addictions might ask, “How do different colleges address the problem of cell phone addiction?” In this case, our interest lies not in the experience of individual students but instead in the campus-to-campus differences in confronting cell phone addictions. A researcher conducting a study of this type might examine schools’ written policies and procedures, so his unit of observation would be documents. However, because he ultimately wishes to describe differences across campuses, the college would be his unit of analysis.

Social phenomena are also a potential unit of analysis. Many sociologists study a variety of social interactions and social problems that fall under this category. Examples include social problems like murder or rape; interactions such as counselling sessions, Facebook chatting, or wrestling; and other social phenomena such as voting and even cell phone use or misuse. A researcher interested in students’ cell phone addictions could ask, “What are the various types of cell phone addictions that exist among students?” Perhaps the researcher will discover that some addictions are primarily centred on social media such as chat rooms, Facebook, or texting, while other addictions centre on single-player games that discourage interaction with others. The resultant typology of cell phone addictions would tell us something about the social phenomenon (unit of analysis) being studied. As in several of the preceding examples, however, the unit of observation would likely be individual people.

Finally, a number of social scientists examine policies and principles, the last type of unit of analysis we will consider here. Studies that analyze policies and principles typically rely on documents as the unit of observation. Perhaps a researcher has been hired by a college to help it write an effective policy against cell phone use in the classroom. In this case, the researcher might gather all previously written policies from campuses all over the country, and compare policies at campuses where the use of cell phones in classroom is low to policies at campuses where the use of cell phones in the classroom is high.

In sum, there are many potential units of analysis that a sociologist might examine, but some of the most common units include the following:

• Individuals
• Organizations
• Social phenomena.
• Policies and principles.

Research Methods for the Social Sciences: An Introduction Copyright © 2020 by Valerie Sheppard is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.23(1); 2018 Feb

Directed qualitative content analysis: the description and elaboration of its underpinning methods and data analysis process

Qualitative content analysis consists of conventional, directed and summative approaches for data analysis. They are used for provision of descriptive knowledge and understandings of the phenomenon under study. However, the method underpinning directed qualitative content analysis is insufficiently delineated in international literature. This paper aims to describe and integrate the process of data analysis in directed qualitative content analysis. Various international databases were used to retrieve articles related to directed qualitative content analysis. A review of literature led to the integration and elaboration of a stepwise method of data analysis for directed qualitative content analysis. The proposed 16-step method of data analysis in this paper is a detailed description of analytical steps to be taken in directed qualitative content analysis that covers the current gap of knowledge in international literature regarding the practical process of qualitative data analysis. An example of “the resuscitation team members' motivation for cardiopulmonary resuscitation” based on Victor Vroom's expectancy theory is also presented. The directed qualitative content analysis method proposed in this paper is a reliable, transparent, and comprehensive method for qualitative researchers. It can increase the rigour of qualitative data analysis, make the comparison of the findings of different studies possible and yield practical results.

Introduction

Qualitative content analysis (QCA) is a research approach for the description and interpretation of textual data using the systematic process of coding. The final product of data analysis is the identification of categories, themes and patterns ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ; Zhang and Wildemuth, 2009 ). Researchers in the field of healthcare commonly use QCA for data analysis ( Berelson, 1952 ). QCA has been described and used in the first half of the 20th century ( Schreier, 2014 ). The focus of QCA is the development of knowledge and understanding of the study phenomenon. QCA, as the application of language and contextual clues for making meanings in the communication process, requires a close review of the content gleaned from conducting interviews or observations ( Downe-Wamboldt, 1992 ; Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ).

QCA is classified into conventional (inductive), directed (deductive) and summative methods ( Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ; Mayring, 2000 , 2014 ). Inductive QCA, as the most popular approach in data analysis, helps with the development of theories, schematic models or conceptual frameworks ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2004 ; Vaismoradi et al., 2013 , 2016 ), which should be refined, tested or further developed by using directed QCA ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ). Directed QCA is a common method of data analysis in healthcare research ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ), but insufficient knowledege is available about how this method is applied ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ). This may hamper the use of directed QCA by novice qualitative researchers and account for a low application of this method compared with the inductive method ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Mayring, 2000 ). Therefore, this paper aims to describe and integrate methods applied in directed QCA.

International databases such as PubMed (including Medline), Scopus, Web of Science and ScienceDirect were searched for retrieval of papers related to QCA and directed QCA. Use of keywords such as ‘directed content analysis’, ‘deductive content analysis’ and ‘qualitative content analysis’ led to 13,738 potentially eligible papers. Applying inclusion criteria such as ‘focused on directed qualitative content analysis’ and ‘published in peer-reviewed journals’; and removal of duplicates resulted in 30 papers. However, only two of these papers dealt with the description of directed QCA in terms of the methodological process. Ancestry and manual searches within these 30 papers revealed the pioneers of the description of this method in international literature. A further search for papers published by the method's pioneers led to four more papers and one monograph dealing with directed QCA ( Figure 1 ).

The search strategy for the identification of papers.

Finally, the authors of this paper integrated and elaborated a comprehensive and stepwise method of directed QCA based on the commonalities of methods discussed in the included papers. Also, the experiences of the current authors in the field of qualitative research were incorporated into the suggested stepwise method of data analysis for directed QCA ( Table 1 ).

The suggested steps for directed content analysis.

While the included papers about directed QCA were the most cited ones in international literature, none of them provided sufficient detail with regard to how to conduct the data analysis process. This might hamper the use of this method by novice qualitative researchers and hinder its application by nurse researchers compared with inductive QCA. As it can be seen in Figure 1 , the search resulted in 5 articles that explain DCA method. The following is description of the articles, along with their strengths and weaknesses. Authors used the strengths in their suggested method as mentioned in Table 1 .

The methods suggested for directed QCA in the international literature

The method suggested by hsieh and shannon (2005).

Hsieh and Shannon (2005) developed two strategies for conducting directed QCA. The first strategy consists of reading textual data and highlighting those parts of the text that, on first impression, appeared to be related to the predetermined codes dictated by a theory or prior research findings. Next, the highlighted texts would be coded using the predetermined codes.

As for the second strategy, the only difference lay in starting the coding process without primarily highlighting the text. In both analysis strategies, the qualitative researcher should return to the text and perform reanalysis after the initial coding process ( Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ). However, the current authors believe that this second strategy provides an opportunity for recognising missing texts related to the predetermined codes and also newly emerged ones. It also enhances the trustworthiness of findings.

As an important part of the method suggested by Hsieh and Shannon (2005) , the term ‘code’ was used for the different levels of abstraction, but a more precise definition of this term seems to be crucial. For instance, they stated that ‘data that cannot be coded are identified and analyzed later to determine if they represent a new category or a subcategory of an existing code’ (2005: 1282).

It seems that the first ‘code’ in the above sentence indicates the lowest level of abstraction that could be achieved instantly from raw data. However, the ‘code’ at the end of the sentence refers to a higher level of abstraction, because it denotes to a category or subcategory.

Furthermore, the interchangeable and inconsistent use of the words ‘predetermined code’ and ‘category’ could be confusing to novice qualitative researchers. Moreover, Hsieh and Shannon (2005) did not specify exactly which parts of the text, whether highlighted, coded or the whole text, should be considered during the reanalysis of the text after initial coding process. Such a lack of specification runs the risk of missing the content during the initial coding process, especially if the second review of the text is restricted to highlighted sections. One final important omission in this method is the lack of an explicit description of the process through which new codes emerge during the reanalysis of the text. Such a clarification is crucial, because the detection of subtle links between newly emerging codes and the predetermined ones is not straightforward.

The method suggested by Elo and Kyngäs (2008)

Elo and Kyngäs (2008) suggested ‘structured’ and ‘unconstrained’ methods or paths for directed QCA. Accordingly, after determining the ‘categorisation matrix’ as the framework for data collection and analysis during the study process, the whole content would be reviewed and coded. The use of the unconstrained matrix allows the development of some categories inductively by using the steps of ‘grouping’, ‘categorisation’ and ‘abstraction’. The use of a structured method requires a structured matrix upon which data are strictly coded. Hypotheses suggested by previous studies often are tested using this method ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ).

The current authors believe that the label of ‘data gathering by the content’ (p. 110) in the unconstrained matrix path can be misleading. It refers to the data coding step rather than data collection. Also, in the description of the structured path there is an obvious discrepancy with regard to the selection of the portions of the content that fit or do not fit the matrix: ‘… if the matrix is structured, only aspects that fit the matrix of analysis are chosen from the data …’; ‘… when using a structured matrix of analysis, it is possible to choose either only the aspects from the data that fit the categorization frame or, alternatively, to choose those that do not’ ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 : 111–112).

Figure 1 in Elo and Kyngäs's paper ( 2008 : 110) clearly distinguished between the structured and unconstrained paths. On the other hand, the first sentence in the above quotation clearly explained the use of the structured matrix, but it was not clear whether the second sentence referred to the use of the structured or unconstrained matrix.

The method suggested by Zhang and Wildemuth (2009)

Considering the method suggested by Hsieh and Shannon (2005) , Zhang and Wildemuth (2009) suggested an eight-step method as follows: (1) preparation of data, (2) definition of the unit of analysis, (3) development of categories and the coding scheme, (4) testing the coding scheme in a text sample, (5) coding the whole text, (6) assessment of the coding's consistency, (7) drawing conclusions from the coded data, and (8) reporting the methods and findings ( Zhang and Wildemuth, 2009 ). Only in the third step of this method, the description of the process of category development, did Zhang and Wildemuth (2009) briefly make a distinction between the inductive versus deductive content analysis methods. On first impression, the only difference between the two approaches seems to be the origin from which categories are developed. In addition, the process of connecting the preliminary codes extracted from raw data with predetermined categories is described. Furthermore, it is not clear whether this linking should be established from categories to primary codes, or vice versa.

The method suggested by Mayring ( 2000 , 2014 )

Mayring ( 2000 , 2014 ) suggested a seven-step method for directed QCA that distinctively differentiated between inductive and deductive methods as follows: (1) determination of the research question and theoretical background, (2) definition of the category system such as main categories and subcategories based on the previous theory and research, (3) establishing a guideline for coding, considering definitions, anchor examples and coding rules, (5) reading the whole text, determining preliminary codes, adding anchor examples and coding rules, (5) revision of the category and coding guideline after working through 10–50% of the data, (6) reworking data if needed, or listing the final category, and (7) analysing and interpreting based on the category frequencies and contingencies.

Mayring suggested that coding rules should be defined to distinctly assign the parts of the text to a particular category. Furthermore, indicating which concrete part of the text serves as typical examples, also known as ‘anchor samples’, and belongs to a particular category was recommended for describing each category ( Mayring, 2000 , 2014 ). The current authors believe that these suggestions help clarify directed QCA and enhance its trustworthiness.

But when the term ‘preliminary coding’ was used, Mayring ( 2000 , 2014 ) did not clearly clarify whether these codes are inductively or deductively created. In addition, Mayring was inclined to apply the quantitative approach implicitly in steps 5 and 7, which is incongruent with the qualitative paradigm. Furthermore, nothing was stated about the possibility of the development of new categories from the textual material: ‘… theoretical considerations can lead to a further categories or rephrasing of categories from previous studies, but the categories are not developed out of the text material like in inductive category formation …’ ( Mayring, 2014 : 97).

Integration and clarification of methods for directed QCA

Directed QCA took different paths when the categorisation matrix contained concepts with higher-level versus lower-level abstractions. In matrices with low abstraction levels, linking raw data to predetermined categories was not difficult, and suggested methods in international nursing literature seem appropriate and helpful. For instance, Elo and Kyngäs (2008) introduced ‘mental well-being threats’ based on the categories of ‘dependence’, ‘worries’, ‘sadness’ and ‘guilt’. Hsieh and Shannon (2005) developed the categories of ‘denial’, ‘anger’, ‘bargaining’, ‘depression’ and ‘acceptance’ when elucidating the stages of grief. Therefore, the low-level abstractions easily could link raw data to categories. The predicament of directed QCA began when the categorisation matrix contained the concepts with high levels of abstraction. The gap regarding how to connect the highly abstracted categories to the raw data should be bridged by using a transparent and comprehensive analysis strategy. Therefore, the authors of this paper integrated the methods of directed QCA outlined in the international literature and elaborated them using the phases of ‘preparation’, ‘organization’ and ‘reporting’ proposed by Elo and Kyngäs (2008) . Also, the experiences of the current authors in the field of qualitative research were incorporated into their suggested stepwise method of data analysis. The method was presented using the example of the “team members’ motivation for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)” based on Victor Vroom's expectancy theory ( Assarroudi et al., 2017 ). In this example, interview transcriptions were considered as the unit of analysis, because interviews are the most common method of data collection in qualitative studies ( Gill et al., 2008 ).

Suggested method of directed QCA by the authors of this paper

This method consists of 16 steps and three phases, described below: preparation phase (steps 1–7), organisation phase (steps 8–15), and reporting phase (step 16).

The preparation phase:

• The acquisition of general skills . In the first step, qualitative researchers should develop skills including self-critical thinking, analytical abilities, continuous self-reflection, sensitive interpretive skills, creative thinking, scientific writing, data gathering and self-scrutiny ( Elo et al., 2014 ). Furthermore, they should attain sufficient scientific and content-based mastery of the method chosen for directed QCA. In the proposed example, qualitative researchers can achieve this mastery through conducting investigations in original sources related to Victor Vroom's expectancy theory. Main categories pertaining to Victor Vroom's expectancy theory were ‘expectancy’, ‘instrumentality’ and ‘valence’. This theory defined ‘expectancy’ as the perceived probability that efforts could lead to good performance. ‘Instrumentality’ was the perceived probability that good performance led to desired outcomes. ‘Valence’ was the value that the individual personally placed on outcomes ( Vroom, 1964 , 2005 ).
• Selection of the appropriate sampling strategy . Qualitative researchers need to select the proper sampling strategies that facilitate an access to key informants on the study phenomenon ( Elo et al., 2014 ). Sampling methods such as purposive, snowball and convenience methods ( Coyne, 1997 ) can be used with the consideration of maximum variations in terms of socio-demographic and phenomenal characteristics ( Sandelowski, 1995 ). The sampling process ends when information ‘redundancy’ or ‘saturation’ is reached. In other words, it ends when all aspects of the phenomenon under study are explored in detail and no additional data are revealed in subsequent interviews ( Cleary et al., 2014 ). In line with this example, nurses and physicians who are the members of the CPR team should be selected, given diversity in variables including age, gender, the duration of work, number of CPR procedures, CPR in different patient groups and motivation levels for CPR.
• Deciding on the analysis of manifest and/or latent content . Qualitative researchers decide whether the manifest and/or latent contents should be considered for analysis based on the study's aim. The manifest content is limited to the transcribed interview text, but latent content includes both the researchers' interpretations of available text, and participants' silences, pauses, sighs, laughter, posture, etc. ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ). Both types of content are recommended to be considered for data analysis, because a deep understanding of data is preferred for directed QCA ( Thomas and Magilvy, 2011 ).
• Developing an interview guide . The interview guide contains open-ended questions based on the study's aims, followed by directed questions about main categories extracted from the existing theory or previous research ( Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ). Directed questions guide how to conduct interviews when using directed or conventional methods. The following open-ended and directed questions were used in this example: An open-ended question was ‘What is in your mind when you are called for performing CPR?’ The directed question for the main category of ‘expectancy’ could be ‘How does the expectancy of the successful CPR procedure motivate you to resuscitate patients?’
• Conducting and transcribing interviews . An interview guide is used to conduct interviews for directed QCA. After each interview session, the entire interview is transcribed verbatim immediately ( Poland, 1995 ) and with utmost care ( Seidman, 2013 ). Two recorders should be used to ensure data backup ( DiCicco-Bloom and Crabtree, 2006 ). (For more details concerning skills required for conducting successful qualitative interviews, see Edenborough, 2002 ; Kramer, 2011 ; Schostak, 2005 ; Seidman, 2013 ).
• Specifying the unit of analysis . The unit of analysis may include the person, a program, an organisation, a class, community, a state, a country, an interview, or a diary written by the researchers ( Graneheim and Lundman, 2004 ). The transcriptions of interviews are usually considered units of analysis when data are collected using interviews. In this example, interview transcriptions and filed notes are considered as the units of analysis.
• Immersion in data . The transcribed interviews are read and reviewed several times with the consideration of the following questions: ‘Who is telling?’, ‘Where is this happening?’, ‘When did it happen?’, ‘What is happening?’, and ‘Why?’ ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ). These questions help researchers get immersed in data and become able to extract related meanings ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Elo et al., 2014 ).

The organisation phase:

The categorisation matrix of the team members' motivation for CPR.

CPR: cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

• Theoretical definition of the main categories and subcategories . Derived from the existing theory or previous research, the theoretical definitions of categories should be accurate and objective ( Mayring, 2000 , 2014 ). As for this example, ‘expectancy’ as a main category could be defined as the “subjective probability that the efforts by an individual led to an acceptable level of performance (effort–performance association) or to the desired outcome (effort–outcome association)” ( Van Eerde and Thierry, 1996 ; Vroom, 1964 ).
• – Expectancy in the CPR was a subjective probability formed in the rescuer's mind.
• – This subjective probability should be related to the association between the effort–performance or effort–outcome relationship perceived by the rescuer.
• The pre-testing of the categorisation matrix . The categorisation matrix should be tested using a pilot study. This is an essential step, particularly if more than one researcher is involved in the coding process. In this step, qualitative researchers should independently and tentatively encode the text, and discuss the difficulties in the use of the categorisation matrix and differences in the interpretations of the unit of analysis. The categorisation matrix may be further modified as a result of such discussions ( Elo et al., 2014 ). This also can increase inter-coder reliability ( Vaismoradi et al., 2013 ) and the trustworthiness of the study.
• Choosing and specifying the anchor samples for each main category . An anchor sample is an explicit and concise exemplification, or the identifier of a main category, selected from meaning units ( Mayring, 2014 ). An anchor sample for ‘expectancy’ as the main category of this example could be as follows: ‘… the patient with advanced metastatic cancer who requires CPR … I do not envision a successful resuscitation for him.’

An example of steps taken for the abstraction of the phenomenon of expectancy (main category).

CPR: cardiopulmonary resuscitation

• The inductive abstraction of main categories from preliminary codes . Preliminary codes are grouped and categorised according to their meanings, similarities and differences. The products of this categorisation process are known as ‘generic categories’ ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ) ( Table 3 ).
• The establishment of links between generic categories and main categories . The constant comparison of generic categories and main categories results in the development of a conceptual and logical link between generic and main categories, nesting generic categories into the pre-existing main categories and creating new main categories. The constant comparison technique is applied to data analysis throughout the study ( Zhang and Wildemuth, 2009 ) ( Table 3 ).

The reporting phase:

• Reporting all steps of directed QCA and findings . This includes a detailed description of the data analysis process and the enumeration of findings ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ). Findings should be systematically presented in such a way that the association between the raw data and the categorisation matrix is clearly shown and easily followed. Detailed descriptions of the sampling process, data collection, analysis methods and participants' characteristics should be presented. The trustworthiness criteria adopted along with the steps taken to fulfil them should also be outlined. Elo et al. (2014) developed a comprehensive and specific checklist for reporting QCA studies.

Trustworthiness

Multiple terms are used in the international literature regarding the validation of qualitative studies ( Creswell, 2013 ). The terms ‘validity’, ‘reliability’, and ‘generalizability’ in quantitative studies are equivalent to ‘credibility’, ‘dependability’, and ‘transferability’ in qualitative studies, respectively ( Polit and Beck, 2013 ). These terms, along with the additional concept of confirmability, were introduced by Lincoln and Guba (1985) . Polit and Beck added the term ‘authenticity’ to the list. Collectively, they are the different aspects of trustworthiness in all types of qualitative studies ( Polit and Beck, 2013 ).

To ehnance the trustworthiness of the directed QCA study, researchers should thoroughly delineate the three phases of ‘preparation’, ‘organization’, and ‘reporting’ ( Elo et al., 2014 ). Such phases are needed to show in detail how categories are developed from data ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2004 ; Vaismoradi et al., 2016 ). To accomplish this, appendices, tables and figures may be used to depict the reduction process ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Elo et al., 2014 ). Furthermore, an honest account of different realities during data analysis should be provided ( Polit and Beck, 2013 ). The authors of this paper believe that adopting this 16-step method can enhance the trustworthiness of directed QCA.

Directed QCA is used to validate, refine and/or extend a theory or theoretical framework in a new context ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ; Hsieh and Shannon, 2005 ). The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive, systematic, yet simple and applicable method for directed QCA to facilitate its use by novice qualitative researchers.

Despite the current misconceptions regarding the simplicity of QCA and directed QCA, knowledge development is required for conducting them ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ). Directed QCA is often performed on a considerable amount of textual data ( Pope et al., 2000 ). Nevertheless, few studies have discussed the multiple steps need to be taken to conduct it. In this paper, we have integrated and elaborated the essential steps pointed to by international qualitative researchers on directed QCA such as ‘preliminary coding’, ‘theoretical definition’ ( Mayring, 2000 , 2014 ), ‘coding rule’, ‘anchor sample’ ( Mayring, 2014 ), ‘inductive analysis in directed qualitative content analysis’ ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2008 ), and ‘pretesting the categorization matrix’ ( Elo et al., 2014 ). Moreover, the authors have added a detailed discussion regarding ‘the use of inductive abstraction’ and ‘linking between generic categories and main categories’.

The importance of directed QCA is increased due to the development of knowledge and theories derived from QCA using the inductive approach, and the growing need to test the theories. Directed QCA proposed in this paper, is a reliable, transparent and comprehensive method that may increase the rigour of data analysis, allow the comparison of the findings of different studies, and yield practical results.

Abdolghader Assarroudi (PhD, MScN, BScN) is Assistant Professor in Nursing, Department of Medical‐Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, Sabzevar, Iran. His main areas of research interest are qualitative research, instrument development study and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Fatemeh Heshmati Nabavi (PhD, MScN, BScN) is Assistant Professor in nursing, Department of Nursing Management, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. Her main areas of research interest are medical education, nursing management and qualitative study.

Mohammad Reza Armat (MScN, BScN) graduated from the Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in 1991 with a Bachelor of Science degree in nursing. He completed his Master of Science degree in nursing at Tarbiat Modarres University in 1995. He is an instructor in North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnourd, Iran. Currently, he is a PhD candidate in nursing at the Mashhad School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Iran.

Abbas Ebadi (PhD, MScN, BScN) is professor in nursing, Behavioral Sciences Research Centre, School of Nursing, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. His main areas of research interest are instrument development and qualitative study.

Mojtaba Vaismoradi (PhD, MScN, BScN) is a doctoral nurse researcher at the Faculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway. He works in Nord’s research group ‘Healthcare Leadership’ under the supervision of Prof. Terese Bondas. For now, this team has focused on conducting meta‐synthesis studies with the collaboration of international qualitative research experts. His main areas of research interests are patient safety, elderly care and methodological issues in qualitative descriptive approaches. Mojtaba is the associate editor of BMC Nursing and journal SAGE Open in the UK.

Key points for policy, practice and/or research

• In this paper, essential steps pointed to by international qualitative researchers in the field of directed qualitative content analysis were described and integrated.
• A detailed discussion regarding the use of inductive abstraction, and linking between generic categories and main categories, was presented.
• A 16-step method of directed qualitative content analysis proposed in this paper is a reliable, transparent, comprehensive, systematic, yet simple and applicable method. It can increase the rigour of data analysis and facilitate its use by novice qualitative researchers.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

• Assarroudi A, Heshmati Nabavi F, Ebadi A, et al.(2017) Professional rescuers' experiences of motivation for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A qualitative study . Nursing & Health Sciences . 19(2): 237–243. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berelson B. (1952) Content Analysis in Communication Research , Glenoce, IL: Free Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cleary M, Horsfall J, Hayter M. (2014) Data collection and sampling in qualitative research: Does size matter? Journal of Advanced Nursing 70 ( 3 ): 473–475. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Coyne IT. (1997) Sampling in qualitative research.. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing 26 ( 3 ): 623–630. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Creswell JW. (2013) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• DiCicco-Bloom B, Crabtree BF. (2006) The qualitative research interview . Medical Education 40 ( 4 ): 314–321. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Downe-Wamboldt B. (1992) Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues . Health Care for Women International 13 ( 3 ): 313–321. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Edenborough R. (2002) Effective Interviewing: A Handbook of Skills and Techniques , 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elo S, Kyngäs H. (2008) The qualitative content analysis process . Journal of Advanced Nursing 62 ( 1 ): 107–115. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, et al.(2014) Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness . SAGE Open 4 ( 1 ): 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, et al.(2008) Methods of data collection in qualitative research: Interviews and focus groups . British Dental Journal 204 ( 6 ): 291–295. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graneheim UH, Lundman B. (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness . Nurse Education Today 24 ( 2 ): 105–112. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis . Qualitative Health Research 15 ( 9 ): 1277–1288. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kramer EP. (2011) 101 Successful Interviewing Strategies , Boston, MA: Course Technology, Cengage Learning. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lincoln YS, Guba EG. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry , Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayring P. (2000) Qualitative Content Analysis . Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1 ( 2 ): Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-00/02-00mayring-e.htm (accessed 10 March 2005). [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayring P. (2014) Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution , Klagenfurt: Monograph. Available at: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-395173 (accessed 10 May 2015). [ Google Scholar ]
• Poland BD. (1995) Transcription quality as an aspect of rigor in qualitative research . Qualitative Inquiry 1 ( 3 ): 290–310. [ Google Scholar ]
• Polit DF, Beck CT. (2013) Essentials of Nursing Research: Appraising Evidence for Nursing Practice , 7th edn. China: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. (2000) Analysing qualitative data . BMJ 320 ( 7227 ): 114–116. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sandelowski M. (1995) Sample size in qualitative research . Research in Nursing & Health 18 ( 2 ): 179–183. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schostak J. (2005) Interviewing and Representation in Qualitative Research , London: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schreier M. (2014) Qualitative content analysis . In: Flick U. (ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis , Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 170–183. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seidman I. (2013) Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences , 3rd edn. New York: Teachers College Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas E, Magilvy JK. (2011) Qualitative rigor or research validity in qualitative research . Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing 16 ( 2 ): 151–155. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaismoradi M, Jones J, Turunen H, et al.(2016) Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis . Journal of Nursing Education and Practice 6 ( 5 ): 100–110. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. (2013) Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study . Nursing & Health Sciences 15 ( 3 ): 398–405. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Eerde W, Thierry H. (1996) Vroom's expectancy models and work-related criteria: A meta-analysis . Journal of Applied Psychology 81 ( 5 ): 575. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vroom VH. (1964) Work and Motivation , New York: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vroom VH. (2005) On the origins of expectancy theory . In: Smith KG, Hitt MA. (eds) Great Minds in Management: The Process of Theory Development , Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 239–258. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang Y, Wildemuth BM. (2009) Qualitative analysis of content . In: Wildemuth B. (ed.) Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science , Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 308–319. [ Google Scholar ]

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case AskWhy Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Unit of Analysis: Definition, Types & Examples

The unit of analysis is the people or things whose qualities will be measured. The unit of analysis is an essential part of a research project. It’s the main thing that a researcher looks at in his research.

A unit of analysis is the object about which you hope to have something to say at the end of your analysis, perhaps the major subject of your research.

In this blog post, we will explore and clarify the concept of the “unit of analysis,” including its definition, various types, and a concluding perspective on its significance.

What is a unit of analysis?

A unit of analysis is the thing you want to discuss after your research, probably what you would regard to be the primary emphasis of your research.

The researcher plans to comment on the primary topic or object in the research as a unit of analysis. The research question plays a significant role in determining it. The “who” or “what” that the researcher is interested in investigating is, to put it simply, the unit of analysis.

In his 2001 book Man, the State, and War, Waltz divides the world into three distinct spheres of study: the individual, the state, and war.

Understanding the reasoning behind the unit of analysis is vital. The likelihood of fruitful research increases if the rationale is understood. An individual, group, organization, nation, social phenomenon, etc., are a few examples.

LEARN ABOUT: Data Analytics Projects

Types of “unit of analysis”

In business research, there are almost unlimited types of possible analytical units. Data analytics and data analysis are closely related processes that involve extracting insights from data to make informed decisions. Even though the most typical unit of analysis is the individual, many research questions can be more precisely answered by looking at other types of units. Let’s find out, 

1. Individual Level

The most prevalent unit of analysis in business research is the individual. These are the primary analytical units. The researcher may be interested in looking into:

• Employee actions
• Perceptions
• Attitudes or opinions.

Employees may come from wealthy or low-income families, as well as from rural or metropolitan areas.

A researcher might investigate if personnel from rural areas are more likely to arrive on time than those from urban areas. Additionally, he can check whether workers from rural areas who come from poorer families arrive on time compared to those from rural areas who come from wealthy families.

Each time, the individual (employee) serving as the analytical unit is discussed and explained. Employee analysis as a unit of analysis can shed light on issues in business, including customer and human resource behavior.

For example, employee work satisfaction and consumer purchasing patterns impact business, making research into these topics vital.

Psychologists typically concentrate on research on individuals. This research may significantly aid a firm’s success, as individuals’ knowledge and experiences reveal vital information. Thus, individuals are heavily utilized in business research.

2. Aggregates Level

Social science research does not usually focus on people. However, by combining individuals’ reactions, social scientists frequently describe and explain social interactions, communities, and groupings. Additionally, they research the collective of individuals, including communities, groups, and countries.

Aggregate levels can be divided into Groups (groups with an ad hoc structure) and Organizations (groups with a formal organization).

The following levels of the unit of analysis are made up of groups of people. A group is defined as two or more individuals who interact, share common traits, and feel connected to one another. 

Many definitions also emphasize interdependence or objective resemblance (Turner, 1982; Platow, Grace, & Smithson, 2011) and those who identify as group members (Reicher, 1982) .

As a result, society and gangs serve as examples of groups. According to Webster’s Online Dictionary (2012), they can resemble some clubs but be far less formal.

Siblings, identical twins, family, and small group functioning are examples of studies with many units of analysis.

In such circumstances, a whole group might be compared to another. Families, gender-specific groups, pals, Facebook groups, and work departments can all be groups.

By analyzing groups, researchers can learn how they form and how age, experience, class, and gender affect them. When aggregated, an individual’s data describes the group they belong to.

Sociologists study groups like economists and businesspeople to form teams to complete projects. They continually research groups and group behavior.

Organizations

The next level of the unit of analysis is organizations, which are groups of people set up formally. Organizations could include businesses, religious groups, parts of the military, colleges, academic departments, supermarkets, business groups, and so on.

The social organization includes things like sexual composition, styles of leadership, organizational structure, systems of communication, and so on. (Susan & Wheelan, 2005; Chapais & Berman, 2004) . (Lim, Putnam, and Robert, 2010) say that well-known social organizations and religious institutions are among them.

Moody, White, and Douglas (2003) say social organizations are hierarchical. Hasmath, Hildebrandt, and Hsu (2016) say social organizations can take different forms. For example, they can be made by institutions like schools or governments.

Sociology, economics, political science, psychology, management, and organizational communication are some social science fields that study organizations (Douma & Schreuder, 2013) .

Organizations are different from groups in that they are more formal and have better organization. A researcher might want to study a company to generalize its results to the whole population of companies.

One way to look at an organization is by the number of employees, the net annual revenue, the net assets, the number of projects, and so on. He might want to know if big companies hire more or fewer women than small companies.

Organization researchers might be interested in how companies like Reliance, Amazon, and HCL affect our social and economic lives. People who work in business often study business organizations.

LEARN ABOUT: Data Management Framework

3. Social Level

The social level has 2 types,

Social Artifacts Level

Things are studied alongside humans. Social artifacts are human-made objects from diverse communities. Social artifacts are items, representations, assemblages, institutions, knowledge, and conceptual frameworks used to convey, interpret, or achieve a goal (IGI Global, 2017).

Cultural artifacts are anything humans generate that reveals their culture (Watts, 1981).

Social artifacts include books, newspapers, advertising, websites, technical devices, films, photographs, paintings, clothes, poems, jokes, students’ late excuses, scientific breakthroughs, furniture, machines, structures, etc. Infinite.

Humans build social objects for social behavior. As people or groups suggest a population in business research, each social object implies a class of items.

Same-class goods include business books, magazines, articles, and case studies. A business magazine’s quantity of articles, frequency, price, content, and editor in a research study may be characterized.

Then, a linked magazine’s population might be evaluated for description and explanation. Marx W. Wartofsky (1979) defined artifacts as primary artifacts utilized in production (like a camera), secondary artifacts connected to primary artifacts (like a camera user manual), and tertiary objects related to representations of secondary artifacts (like a camera user-manual sculpture).

The scientific study of an artifact reveals its creators and users. The artifact researcher may be interested in advertising, marketing, distribution, buying, etc.

Social Interaction Level

Social artifacts include social interaction. Such as:

• Eye contact with a coworker
• Buying something in a store
• Friendship decisions
• Road accidents
• Airline hijackings
• Professional counseling
• Whatsapp messaging

A researcher might study youthful employees’ smartphone addictions. Some addictions may involve social media, while others involve online games and movies that inhibit connection.

Smartphone addictions are examined as a societal phenomenon. Observation units are probably individuals (employees).

Anthropologists typically study social artifacts. They may be interested in the social order. A researcher who examines social interactions may be interested in how broader societal structures and factors impact daily behavior, festivals, and weddings.

LEARN ABOUT: Level of Analysis

Even though there is no perfect way to do research, it is generally agreed that researchers should try to find a unit of analysis that keeps the context needed to make sense of the data.

Researchers should consider the details of their research when deciding on the unit of analysis. 

They should remember that consistent use of these units throughout the analysis process (from coding to developing categories and themes to interpreting the data) is essential to gaining insight from qualitative data and protecting the reliability of the results.

QuestionPro does much more than merely serve as survey software. We have a solution for every sector of the economy and every kind of issue. We also have systems for managing data, such as our research repository, Insights Hub.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

Experimental vs Observational Studies: Differences & Examples

Sep 5, 2024

Interactive Forms: Key Features, Benefits, Uses + Design Tips

Sep 4, 2024

Closed-Loop Management: The Key to Customer Centricity

Sep 3, 2024

Net Trust Score: Tool for Measuring Trust in Organization

Sep 2, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
• Uncategorized
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The central role of the unit of analysis concept in research design

2010, Journal of the School of Business Administration, …

Related Papers

Journal of General Management Research

Drsanjay Kumar

The main aim of the paper was to understand the different issues of unit of analysis in a business research. The qualitative approach was used to explore the different issues related to unit of analysis through in-depth review of literature. In this paper different levels of unit of analysis are described. The relation between the unit of analysis and unit of observation is explained. Faulty reasoning about the unit of analysis is discussed with suitable examples. The possible data analysis options are discussed taking into consideration the unit of analysis. This paper will be a good reference material for new researchers in understanding the unit of analysis for the planning and designing their research work at master's and doctorate level.

Niveda Subramanian

Anales De Psicologia

Carlos Santoyo

International Journal of Religion

José Mario Ochoa-Pachas , Luis Pajuelo , JOSE MARIO OCHOA PACHAS

It is common to use Bloom's taxonomy to write research objectives; however, it is often forgotten that this Bloomian classification corresponds to the teaching-learning process. Likewise, is not usual to include the levels or scope of research since so many classifications have been proposed, suggesting that science can be fragmented and that qualitative studies have nothing to do with quantitative studies and vice versa. Regardless of the coincidences and discrepancies that may exist, researchers require a guideline that is based on the principles of science to be able to organize and structure their studies and that allows for growth and development, removing biases and partialities from analysis. It is necessary to remember that a taxonomy is valid if it adheres to the criteria that scientific knowledge itself indicates. This research is an exploratory and observational study whose purpose is to identify its objectives according to its levels with their respective study variables.

Joel Ashirwadam

Rekha Mudkanna

Symeou, L. & Lamprianou, J.

Loizos Symeou , Iasonas Lamprianou

mark vince agacite

Rahul Pilani

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Lova Rakotoarison

Journal of Xidian University

Rahat Sabah

Naveen Kumar

mubashar yaqoob

Kelitah Philips

Tutors India

Bhimashankar Sanga

Chirapol Sintunawa

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences

Agnes Moors

Gerardo Munck

Saeed Anwar

Research Process and Stages in Social Sciences

yavuz ercan Gul

Moore, M. A.

Goodeys Moore

Hafizullah Baha

Chisomo Mgunda

khadidja Hammoudi

Dagobert Soergel

Mohamed Aboulfotoh

Victor Ramapala

kassu sileyew

Catherine N . Mwai

lokender singh

Contributions to Management Science

Paul Hanges

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024