ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

比较定性内容分析×比较主题分析×
领域质性质性
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份1983 (Mayring's QCA foundation); comparative adaptations prominent from 2000s onward2000s–2010s (as an explicit comparative variant of thematic analysis)
提出者Philipp Mayring (qualitative content analysis); comparative application developed across communication, policy, and social science researchVirginia Braun & Victoria Clarke (thematic analysis foundation); comparative extension developed in applied policy and cross-cultural qualitative research traditions
类型Qualitative research design and analysis strategyQualitative comparative analytical strategy
开创性文献Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Sage. ISBN: 978-0857029201Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. DOI ↗
别名comparative QCA, cross-case qualitative content analysis, multi-context qualitative content analysis, comparative interpretive content analysiscross-group thematic analysis, comparative TA, multi-group thematic analysis, comparative qualitative thematic analysis
相关46
摘要Comparative qualitative content analysis (comparative QCA) applies a systematic, category-driven reading of texts or documents across two or more cases, groups, time periods, or cultural contexts, with the explicit goal of identifying similarities, differences, and patterns that emerge from the comparison. It combines the interpretive rigour of qualitative content analysis with a structured comparative logic, making it valuable for cross-national policy research, media studies, and any inquiry that requires principled comparison of meaning across contexts.Comparative Thematic Analysis applies the structured procedures of thematic analysis across two or more distinct groups, sites, or time points, with the explicit aim of identifying both shared patterns and meaningful differences. Rather than producing a single composite account of experience, it yields a layered analysis that maps where themes converge and diverge across comparison units — making it especially valuable for policy-relevant, cross-cultural, or multi-site qualitative studies.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Comparative Qualitative content analysis · Comparative Thematic Analysis. 于 2026-06-18 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare