Porównaj metody
Przeglądaj wybrane metody obok siebie; wiersze, które się różnią, są wyróżnione.
| Porównawcza Refleksyjna Analiza Tematyczna× | Analiza ramowa× | |
|---|---|---|
| Dziedzina | Metody jakościowe | Metody jakościowe |
| Rodzina | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Rok powstania≠ | 2006 (reflexive TA); comparative application formalised ~2019–2021 | 1994 |
| Twórca≠ | Virginia Braun & Victoria Clarke | Jane Ritchie & Liz Spencer (National Centre for Social Research, UK) |
| Typ≠ | Qualitative analytic approach | Qualitative research method |
| Źródło pierwotne≠ | Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage. ISBN: 978-1473953406 | Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data (pp. 173–194). Routledge. link ↗ |
| Inne nazwy | Comparative RTA, cross-group thematic analysis, comparative TA, comparative qualitative thematic comparison | FA, Framework Method, Framework Approach, Applied Qualitative Analysis |
| Pokrewne≠ | 4 | 6 |
| Podsumowanie≠ | Comparative Reflexive Thematic Analysis (CRTA) applies Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis framework to data drawn from two or more distinct groups, time points, or contexts, with the explicit goal of contrasting thematic patterns across those groups. The reflexive element means the analyst continuously interrogates how their own perspectives and positioning shape the themes they construct, while the comparative element directs attention to differences and similarities between data sets rather than seeking a single unified account. | Framework Analysis is a structured qualitative method developed by Jane Ritchie and Liz Spencer at the UK National Centre for Social Research in 1994. It organises qualitative data into a thematic matrix — the analytical framework — enabling systematic comparison across participants and themes. Originally designed for applied policy research with specific questions and timelines, it is now widely used in health services, social policy, and management research where transparency and rigorous cross-case comparison are essential. |
| ScholarGateZbiór danych ↗ |
|
|