Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review

By Bram De Wever, Tammy Schellens, Martin Valcke, Hilde Van Keer. Comput. Educ., 2006

1,042 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/64602b727cece0cd71ba8d65da6921d4667c1992

How researchers see this paper

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

In Communication

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Social Learning Analytics (2012, background): “…of any of these tools, researchers face the bigger challenge of identifying an analytic framework that “emphasizes the criteria of reliability and validity and the counting of instances within a predefined set of mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive categories” (de Wever et al., 2006).”
Analytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Learning Environments (2007, background): “Therefore, researchers in this field should always question the extent to which the definitions of argumentation quality from frameworks with origins in other domains fit questions and theories that are important in educational research ( De Wever et al. 2006 ).”
Characterizing Online Discussion Using Coarse Discourse Sequences (2017, background): “Discourse acts have also been studied in the context of education (De Wever et al. 2006; Scheuer et al. 2010).”
Social learning analytics: five approaches (2012, methodology): “This method has been used to investigate a variety of issues related to online social learning, including collaborative learning, presence and online cooperation [36].”
Qualitative Analysis of Content by (2005, result): “Messages have to be unitized before they can be coded, and differences in the unit definition can affect coding decisions as well as the comparability of outcomes with other similar studies (De Wever et al., 2006).”
Content analysis: What are they talking about? (2006, neutral): “For this reason we have reported two kappa statistics, one for the subcategory level and for the level of the main categories (for more detail on calculation of coding reliability see also De Wever et al., 2005).”
A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes (2007, methodology): “First, compared to coding schemes (e.g., De Wever et al., 2006), which are employed to assess the frequency of specific behavioral indicators or types of utterances, a rating scheme allows a more direct assessment of process quality.”