ror.org/04q0nd296
Abstracts
Résumé
À partir d’une analyse de 295 publications dans des revues francophones publiées de 2004 à 2019, cet article s’intéresse à l’adoption, à l’usage et à l’utilisation qui est faite et peut être faite de NVivo. Nous soulignons les limites, erreurs et omissions sur la manière de conduire une analyse avec ce logiciel. Cet article propose un guide de recommandations utiles aux chercheurs, praticiens, évaluateurs ou éditeurs de revues scientifiques qui s’interrogent sur les manières de mobiliser NVivo et de justifier son adoption, son usage et son utilisation.
Mots-clés :
- NVivo,
- ADQAO,
- recherche qualitative,
- méthodologie
Abstract
Based on an analysis of 295 publications in French-speaking journals published from 2004 to 2019, this article questions the adoption, use and utilization that is made and could be made of NVivo. We highlight the limitations, errors and omissions about the way to conduct an analysis with this software. This article also ends with a guide of useful recommendations for researchers, practitioners, reviewers or editors of scientific journals who are wondering how to mobilize NVivo for a better adoption, use and utilization of this software.
Keywords:
- NVivo,
- CAQDAS,
- qualitative research,
- methodology
Resumen
A partir de un análisis de 295 publicaciones en revistas de lengua francesa publicadas entre 2004 y 2019, este artículo examina la adopción, el uso y la utilización que se hace y se puede hacer de NVivo. Destacamos las limitaciones, los errores y las omisiones sobre cómo realizar un análisis con este software. Este artículo ofrece una guía de recomendaciones útiles para investigadores, profesionales, revisores o editores de revistas que estén considerando cómo movilizar NVivo y justificar su adopción, uso y aplicación.
Palabras clave:
- NVivo,
- CAQDAS,
- investigación cualitativa,
- metodología
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Aldebert, B., & Rouzies, A. (2014). « Quelle place pour les méthodes mixtes dans la recherche francophone en management ? ». Management international/International Management/Gestiòn Internacional, Vol. 19, N° 1, p. 43-60.
- Auger, p. (2006). « Une méthode de recherche innovante : l’utilisation du logiciel Nvivo pour les analyses de littérature », Revue Sciences de Gestion, Vol. 57, p. 113-129.
- Averseng, C. (2011). « Comment structurer la complexité sans renoncer à l’exhaustivité thématique d’un état de l’art en sciences de gestion ? Retour d’expérience sur l’apport méthodologique des outils de classification de données qualitatives », Management & Avenir, N° 1, p. 369-386.
- Bandeira-De-Mello, R., & Garreau, L. (2011). « L’utilisation d’Atlas.ti pour améliorer les recherches dans le cadre de la Méthode de la Théorisation Enracinée (MTE) : panacée ou mirage ? », Recherches Qualitatives, Vol. 30, N° 2, p. 175-202.
- Baudet, C. & Lebraty, J-F. (2018). « Fred D. Davis, L’acceptation d’un modèle par les systèmes d’information », in Les grands auteurs en systèmes d’information, EMS Management et Société, Caen, p. 115-133.
- Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative analysis with NVivo, 2nd edition, Sage Publications, 328 p.
- Bournois, F., Point, S., & Voynnet-Fourboul, C. (2002). « L’analyse des données qualitatives assistée par ordinateur », Revue Française de Gestion, Vol. 28, N° 137, p. 71-84.
- Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information : Thematic analysis and code development, Sage Publications.
- Cambra-Fierro, J., & Wilson, A. (2011). « Qualitative data analysis software : Will it ever become mainstream ? Evidence from Spain”, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 53, N° 1, p. 17-24.
- Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). « Grounded theory research : Procedures, cannons, and evluative criteria », Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 13, N° 1, p. 3-21.
- Davis, F. D. (1989). « Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology », MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, p. 3, p. 319-340.
- DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). “The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success : A Ten- Year Update”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 19, N° 4, p. 9-30.
- Di Gregorio, S. (2000). “Using NVivo for your literature review”, in Strategies in qualitative Research : Issues and Results from Analysis Using QSR NVivo and NUD* IST, Conference at the institute of Education, London, p. 29-30.
- Fielding, N. G., & Lee, R. M. (1998). Computer analysis and qualitative research, Sage Publications, 216 p.
- Franzosi, R., Doyle, S., McClelland, L. E., Putnam Rankin, C., & Vicari, S. (2013). « Quantitative narrative analysis software options compared : PC-ACE and CAQDAS (ATLAS.ti, MAXqda, and NVivo) », Quality and Quantity, Vol. 47, N° 6, p. 3219-3247.
- Feng, X., & Behar-Horenstein, L. (2019). « Maximizing NVivo Utilities to Analyze Open-Ended Responses », The Qualitative Report, Vol. 24, N° 3, p. 563-571.
- Garside, R. (2014). “Should we appraise the quality of qualitative research reports for systematic reviews, and if so, how ?”, Innovation : The European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 27, N° 1, p. 67-79.
- Glaser, B. G. (2014). Memoing. Sociology Press.
- Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of grounded theory : Strategies for qualitative research, New York : Aldine Transaction.
- Harley, B., & Cornelissen, J. (à paraître). “Rigor with or without templates ? The pursuit of methodological rigor in qualitative research”. Organizational Research Methods.
- Hutchison, A. J., Johnston, L. H., & Breckon, J. D. (2010). “Using QSR-NVivo to facilitate the development of a grounded theory project : an account of a worked example”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 13, N° 4, p. 283-302.
- Jarzabkowski, P., Langley, A. & Nigam, A. (2021). “Navigating the tensions of quality in qualitative research”. Strategic Organization, 19, N° 1, p. 70-80.
- Jonsen, K., Fendt, J., & Point, S. (2018). “Convincing qualitative research : what constitutes persuasive writing ?”, Organizational Research Methods, 21(1), p. 30-67.
- Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., & Chervany, N. L. (1999). “Information technology adoption across time : A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 23, N° 2, p. 183-213.
- Kerr, C., Nixon, A., Wild, D. (2010). “Assessing and demonstrating data saturation in qualitative inquiry supporting patient-reported outcomes research”, Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, Vol. 10, N° 3, p. 269-81.
- Mangabeira, Wilma C.; Lee, Raymond M. & Fielding, Nigel G. (2004). “Computers and qualitative research : Adoption, use and representation”, Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 22, N° 2, p. 167-178.
- Miles et Huberman (1991). Analyse des données qualitatives : recueil de nouvelles méthodes, De Boeck Supérieur, Paris, 480 p.
- Miron, J.-M., & Dragon, J.-F. (2007). « La recherche qualitative assistée par ordinateur, pour les budgets minceurs, est-ce possible ? », Recherches Qualitatives, Vol. 2, N° 27, p. 152-175.
- O’Kane, P., Smith, A., & Lerman, M. P. (2021). « Building transparency and trustworthiness in inductive research through computer-aided qualitative data analysis software », Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 24, N° 1, p. 104-139.
- Oliveira, M., Bitencourt, C., Santos, A. C., & Kunzel Teixeira, E. (2013). “Thematic Content Analysis : Is There a Difference Between the Support Provided by the MAXQDA and NVivo Software”, in Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Research Methods for Business and Management Studies, p. 304-314.
- Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). « Validity and qualitative research : An oxymoron ? », Quality & Quantity, Vol. 41, p. 233-249.
- Paulus, T., Woods, M., Atkins, D. P., & Macklin, R. (2017). “The discourse of QDAS : Reporting practices of ATLAS. ti and NVivo users with implications for best practices”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 20, N° 1, p. 35-47.
- Paillé, P., & Mucchielli, A. (2016). L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales (4e ed.), Armand Colin, 432 p.
- Point, S., & Voynnet Fourboul, C. (2006). « Le codage à visée théorique », Recherche et Applications en Marketing », vol 21, N° 4, p. 61-78.
- Pratt, M. (2009). “From the editors : For the lack of a boilerplate : Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research”. Academy of Management Journal 52, N° 5, p. 856-862.
- Reinhardt, A., Kreiner, G., Gioia, D. & Corley, K. (2018). “Conducting and publishing rigorous qualitative research”, in C. Cassell, A. Cunliffe & G. Grandy (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods, London : SAGE, p. 515-532.
- Rich, M., & Patashnick, J. (2002). « Narrative research with audio visual data : Video intervention/prevention assessment (VIA) and NVivo », International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 5, N° 3, p. 245-261.
- Richards, L. (1999). « Data alive ! The thinking behind NVivo”, Qualitative health research, Vol. 9, N° 3, p. 412-428.
- Richards, T. (2002). « An intellectual history of NUD* IST and NVivo », International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 5; N° 3, p. 199-214.
- Richards, T. & Richards, L. (1994). “Using computers in qualitative research”, in Stake, R. E., Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds), Handbook of qualitative research, N° 2, p. 445-462.
- Robins, C. S., & Eisen, K. (2017). « Strategies for the effective use of NVivo in a large-scale study : Qualitative analysis and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell », Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 23, N° 10, p. 768-778.
- Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations, The Free Press.
- Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers, Sage Publications, 400 p.
- Santiago-Delefosse, M., Gavin, A., Bruchez, C., Roux, P., Stephen, S. L. (2016). « Quality of qualitative research in the health sciences : Analysis of the common criteria present in 58 assessment guidelines by expert users », Social Science & Medicine, N° 148, p. 142-151.
- Saunders, M. N. K., & Townsend, K. (2016). « Reporting and Justifying the Number of Interview Participants in Organization and Workplace Research », British Journal of Management, Vol. 27, N° 4, p. 836-852.
- Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research : Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, Sage Publications, 312 p.
- Tesh, R. (1990). Qualitative research : analysis types and software tools, Falcon Press.
- Thomas, M. (2011). “The Utility and Facility of Qualitative Research Software in Grounded Theory Research”, in V. Martin & A. Gynnild, Grounded Theory, the Philosophy, Method and Work of Barney Glaser, N° 8, p. 133-146.
- Welsh, E. (2002). “Dealing with data : Using NVivo in the qualitative data analysis process”. In Forum qualitative sozialforschung/Forum : qualitative social research, Vol. 3, N° 2.
- Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). « User Acceptance of Information Technology : Toward a Unified View », MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, N° 3, p. 425-478.
- Weitzman, E., & Miles, M. B. (1995). Computer programs for qualitative data analysis, Sage Publications, 384 p.
- Woods, M., Paulus, T., Atkins, D. P., & Macklin, R. (2016). “Advancing qualitative research using qualitative data analysis software (QDAS) ? Reviewing potential versus practice in published studies using ATLAS. ti and NVivo, 1994-2013”, Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 34, N° 5, p. 597-617.
- Zamawe, F. C. (2015). “The implication of using NVivo software in qualitative data analysis : Evidence-based reflections”, Malawi Medical Journal, Vol. 27, N° 1, p. 13-15.
10.7202/1028489ar