Сравнение методов

	Интерпретативный качественный контент-анализ	Интерпретативный анализ документов
Область	Качественные методы	Качественные методы
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Год появления	2005 (interpretive strand formalised); qualitative content analysis roots in the 1980s–1990s	2000s (building on hermeneutic traditions from the 20th century)
Автор метода	Hsiu-Fang Hsieh & Sarah E. Shannon (conventional/interpretive strand); Phillip Mayring (qualitative content analysis generally)	Glenn Bowen (systematic method); Lindsay Prior (social use of documents)
Тип	Qualitative analytic approach	Qualitative document-based research method
Основополагающий источник	Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.	Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40.
Другие названия	conventional content analysis, inductive qualitative content analysis, interpretive QCA, IQCA	interpretive documentary analysis, hermeneutic document analysis, qualitative document analysis, interpretive textual analysis
Связанные	5	6
Сводка	Interpretive qualitative content analysis (also called conventional content analysis) is a qualitative approach to systematically analysing text in which coding categories emerge directly from the data rather than from a pre-defined coding scheme. The researcher immerses themselves in the material, derives codes inductively through close reading, groups those codes into interpretive categories, and constructs a conceptual account of the content's meaning. It is especially suited to domains where existing theory is sparse and the aim is to understand how participants describe or make sense of a phenomenon.	Interpretive document analysis is a qualitative method that systematically examines written, visual, or digital documents to construct meaning from them within their social, historical, and institutional contexts. Rather than simply counting content categories, it reads documents as social artefacts — asking not only what a document says, but what it does, who produced it, for what purpose, and what assumptions it encodes. The approach draws on hermeneutic and interpretive traditions to move between individual passages and the broader context in which they were created.