Janice M. Morse

                                8

SUMMARY OF MAJOR METHODS FOR EXPLORING CONCEPTS

                “Anything worth doing, is worth doing properly …”

—Bob’s mother (personal communication)

Important concepts that contribute to the discipline, to theory development, and to understanding, must be developed using solid methods and optimal information as data. The goal is to develop the best possible concepts in order to contribute to theory, research, and the discipline. In this book, the major methods of concept analysis are reviewed. These methods may be classified as philosophical, meta-analytic, and those using qualitative inquiry or a combination of data sources.

PHILOSOPHICAL METHODS FOR CONCEPT ANALYSIS

Philosophical methods, based on the work of Wittgenstein, use logic, reflection, reviews of the literature, and created exemplars (as cases) for the development of concepts. This is the most frequently used approach for concept development. Perhaps because of the clarity in the description of the method, the fact that there is a need for the collection of data (and the institutional review board [IRB] application and approval), the work may be easily completed as a class assignment. However, the method has been criticized: Results are predictable, and lack depth and insight. Of greatest concern, the most common finding at the completion of the studies is that “further investigation is required,” indicating that the method does not achieve its original aim of actually “developing” the concept.

Walker and Avant (1983, 2011)

In 1963, John Wilson, a British high school teacher, published a small book describing a straightforward method of concept analysis for high school students, based on the work of Wittgenstein. This method used an 11-step process which, in 1983, Walker and Avant further simplified and published as eight steps, to be used iteratively:

Details for conducting each step are provided in their text. Briefly, the method is “an analysis of the [selected] descriptive word” as it is “used in language coupled with an explanation of how it is “like and not like other related terms or words” (p. 158). Walker and Avant (2011) are concerned with the actual and possible uses of the words that convey conceptual meanings (p. 158). By doing so, they hoped to “break the concept into its simpler elements” to “determine its internal structure” (p. 158). Data are obtained from dictionaries, thesauruses, literature, and so forth, to “identify as many uses of the word as possible” including the “ordinary and scientific uses,” and “keeping in mind the purpose of your work.” Instructions are vague, but the student has access to many examples.

Defining the attributes extends from these definitions and uses of the word. Model cases are prototypical cases that may come from the literature, experience, or “even constructed by you,” and demonstrates “all instances of the attributes” (Walker & Avant, 2011, p. 163). Next, the student identifies or creates other types of cases, borderline, related, contrary, invented, and illegitimate cases, which are then examined to “help you make better judgments about which defining attributes or characteristics have the best ‘fit’” and “help you decide what ‘counts’ and what ‘doesn’t count’” (p. 164). The final step is to identify the antecedents and the consequences of the concept.

The most important aspect that differentiates Walker and Avant’s method from others is that it is not interpretative, but descriptive; unfortunately, this results in little insight or development of new understandings. Using created cases as “data” is a limitation also previously noted (Hupcey, Morse, Lenz, & Tasón, 1996).

Walker and Avant (2011, pp. 169–170) have identified a number of studies they consider to be excellent examples of studies using their method and covering a variety of topics serving as examples of concept analysis. For instance, see Ellis-Stoll and Popkess-Vawter (1998), Mulder (2006), and Trendall (2000).

Rodgers (1993), Rogders and Knafl (2000): The Evolutionary Method

Concepts develop, and maturation is through malleable processes of application, significance, and use which, over time, change its meaning. Rodgers’s method of concept analysis, the evolutionary view, closely resembles Walker and Avant’s method, with several important differences. First, data used for analysis is the professional literature, within a particular context. The second important difference is that exemplars are selected from the literature. The interactive tasks are similar, but are developed to the level of hypothesis testing:

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Join