Validity in quantitative content analysis

By Liam Rourke, Terry Anderson. 2004

444 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Gender Studies, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/50240c32420328e877a81d0e9d9ac32527248966

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. D. Randy Garrison
2. J. Ben Arbaugh
3. Bram De Wever
4. Martin Valcke
5. Hilde Van Keer
6. Terry Anderson
7. Walter Archer
8. Tammy Schellens

In Gender Studies

1. D. Randy Garrison
2. Walter Archer
3. Terry Anderson
4. Martin Valcke

In Social Psychology

1. Bram De Wever
2. D. Randy Garrison
3. J. Ben Arbaugh
4. Martin Valcke
5. Hilde Van Keer
6. Tammy Schellens
7. Walter Archer
8. Terry Anderson

Citations in the corpus

• The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective (2010, methodology): “These methodological challenges motivated a second paper on validity in quantitative content analysis (Rourke & Anderson, 2004) in which we continued to wrestle with methodological issues and began arguing for multi-methodological studies that augmented the shortcomings of quantitative analysis…”
• Qualitative Content Analysis (2014, background): “…the quality of qualitative content analysis findings is also needed, particularly as several articles have been published on the validity and reliability of quantitative content analysis (Neuendorf, 2011; Potter & Levine-Donnerstein, 1999; Rourke & Anderson, 2004) than qualitative content analysis.”
• Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review (2006, background): “More-over, supporting the accumulating validity of an existing procedure has another advantage, namely the possibility to use and contribute to a growing catalogue of normative data (Rourke & Anderson, 2003).”
• ONLINE COMMUNITY OF INQUIRY REVIEW: SOCIAL, COGNITIVE, AND TEACHING PRESENCE ISSUES (2019, background): “Their point is that much of the online transcript analysis is descriptive and at some point there needs to be a transition to inference and “a richer definition of test validity” [42].”
• Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions (2007, background): “Rourke and Anderson (2004) argue for a quantitative content analysis technique and question the rigor of the research to date in this area.”
• Content analysis: What are they talking about? (2006, unknown): “…analysis (through reports or websites) to aid the establishment of construct validity (i.e., the operationalisation of the variable of interest, relative to the data) and the validity of the content analysis procedure with respect to di V erent educational settings (Rourke & Anderson, 2004).”