Audio recordings were transcribed using the closed caption transcription service provided by CameraTag. One of the study investigators (KC) listened to the recordings and corrected any transcription errors. The transcribed data were analysed using a narrative coding and conceptualization process. Though this study does not employ Grounded Theory (GT) proper, the analytic process is derived from the coding and conceptualization processes of GT (Charmaz, 2014 ; Glaser & Strauss, 2019 (link)). One of the investigators (J.W.), an expert in qualitative research and grounded theory, provided training and oversight of this process. We followed these steps in our data analysis, mimicking the steps taken in GT coding: Four investigators (L.Z, R.H, K.C. and E.M) independently coded transcripts line-by-line using an open-coding technique. Memos were recorded by each coder during the coding process to track potential emergent themes. Once this was completed, coders met to create a combined master list of codes by synthesizing their independent codes into amalgams that more robustly captured what was emergent in the data. While there was some variance across coders initially, it was primarily due to the degree to which some coders combined codes into fewer codes at this step. Differences were resolved through discussion and mutual consensus was obtained. Investigators then independently raised the agreed upon open-codes into axial codes by bringing similar or related codes together under aggregate constructs. The team then met to consolidate independently derived axial codes into categories using a similar process of synthesis as above to create the strongest aggregate expressions of concepts in the data. Finally, the team activated categories and/or connected multiple categories together into propositions that captured the larger emergent themes of the data.
Free full text: Click here
