VARIAB LES
A variable is a concept that allows for variations of its instances. In the above, we took a variable as a placeholder for any one of several mutually exclusive values. In Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary ( 1 1th edition), the adjective variable is defined as "able or apt to vary," and the noun variable is defined as " something that is variable" and as "a quantity that may assume any one of a set of values. " Variation is what enables data to be " informative. " Indeed, the variable sex has no descriptive significance unless one can distinguish between males and females, and the notion of bias in journalism is meaningless unless journalists have the option of leaning toward one or the other side of a contro
versy. In other words, if the units of a content analysis do not exhibit variation in their description, analysis of the units cannot inform anything.
The individual values of a variable must be mutually exclusive relative to each other. This satisfies the requirement that a data language be unambiguous and in effect partitions the set of recording units (the sample) into mutually exclusive classes. Jointly, the values of a variable must provide an exhaustive account of all units, which means that the partition of the sample should leave nothing unac
counted for. In content analysis, the requirement of exhaustiveness is sometimes relaxed when it comes to irrelevant matter. In this respect, the social sciences deviate from physics, for example, which assumes that all physical objects have the same dimensions.
The idea of a variable of mutually exclusive and descriptively exhaustive values is so general that it occurs in numerous intellectual endeavors, albeit with different names. Some correspondences are presented below. The set theoretical expression "aEA " probably is the most general one; it simply states that the element a is a member of the set A of elements.
Values of a Variable a E A
Categories Set of categories Points Scale
Members Family or class Position Dimension Locations Space
Measures Gauge States System Tokens Type Elements Set
Sets Possible sets
The concept of a variable with mutually exclusive values does not mean that content analysts are limited to single-valued descriptions, to assigning one and only one value to each recording unit. Text typically affords multiple interpreta
tions, whether because readers with different backgrounds and interests come up with unique but, in the aggregate, divergent interpretations or because ambigu
ity leads a single reader to alternative and equally valid interpretations. A vari
able that records possible sets (the last on the above list), possible patterns, or possible connections affords multi-valued descriptions. Multiple interpretations of text may present problems for coding-for the semantics of a data language and for reliability-and for the analytical techniques available for handling such data, but they are not incompatible with the notion of variables.
Variables may be open-ended or limited. At least in principle, numerical vari
ables are open-ended-there is no largest or smallest number. Open-ended vari
ables require conceptual clarity on the part of coders or, in the natural sciences, knowledge of the construction of the measuring instrument. For instance, when coding instructions call for the rephrasing of a text into the form
[ ] says [ ] to [
],
such as "[Jim] says [hi] to [Mary], " coders are guided by concepts of what would fit in the empty places. In context, one could easily rephrase this as "who" says
"what" to "whom"-much as Piault had no doubt as to which words attributed personal qualities, but no idea of which would show up. The values in open
ended variables are outside the control of the research designer.
When variables are limited, analysts may define them implicitly, by specifying their range, or explicitly, by listing all alternative values. Many social variables are defined by concepts that imply definite ranges. For example, the concepts of gender, marital status, and kin offer limited vocabularies to describe all possible kinds. Sometimes institutions limit the ranges of variables (e.g., kinds of criminal offenses in a legal code or kinds of mental illnesses in the DSM-IV-R ) and some
times particular theories do (e.g., dramaturgical roles in fiction or types of per
sonalities). Somewhat more tailored for quantification are verbally anchored
DATA LANG UAG ES
1 5 7
scales of measurement, such as 7-point semantic differential scales. A semantic differential scale shows a pair of words representing polar opposites separated by a quantified continuum. For example:
Prosocial f-I--+---+---t-----t----+-----11 Antisocial When using such a scale, coders presumably create in their minds a continuum of meanings between the designated extremes and then judge where an observed phenomenon or verbal expression would belong. The endpoints of the scale are defined by the conceptions that readers have of these adjectives; the remainder is semantically implicit in the use of the continuum, which pertains to the syntax of the data language using this variable.
Finally, analysts may define variables explicitly, in terms of complete lists of values. For example, Searle ( 1 969) claimed to have identified a mutually exclu
sive and exhaustive set of five values for the variable "speech acts":
Representatives Directives Cammissives Expressives Declaratives
The three ways of defining variables noted above may also be recognized in the design of coding sheets, recording devices, and computer interfaces. Coders typically handwrite or type the values of open-ended variables into prepared openings; indicate variables defined implicitly by turning knobs, arranging objects to indicate how different they are, or marking or clicking on the points of scales; and indicate those defined by explicit lists by checking one of several alternatives.
Usually, analysts can choose among alternative data languages for recording the same kind of information. For example, one could ask coders to identify which of 20 logically possible communication networks are operating within a five-person group or which of 1 0 possible communication channels between pairs of members of that group are being used. These two ways provide the same information. The choice of one data language over another may be informed by differences in the coding effort required, perhaps by issues of reliability, but certainly by differences in the amount of information the data languages provide.
In general, content analysts should construct data languages that are as detailed and basic as they can possibly be and leave as much to computation as possible.
For example, Budd's ( 1964) attention measure, Gerbner, Gross, Signorielli, Morgan, and Jackson-Beeck's ( 1979) violence index, and Hawk's ( 1 997) listen
ability scores for TV programming, modeled after Flesch's ( 1 974) readability yardstick, are all computed on the results of numerous simple coding judgments.
An analyst could, of course, define a far simpler higher-level data language-a ratio scale for recording attention, violence, and listenability as an overall coder judgment, for example-but it has been shown that such measures do not achieve reliability, and they cannot provide the fine distinctions that aggregate measures produce.
Unfortunately, content analysts often publish their results without making their "conceptual schemes" or " systems of categories" explicit, perhaps because they are not clear themselves as to the nature of the data languages they employed. Consider the following scheme, reported in the literature by Herma, Kriss, and Shor ( 1 943):
Standards for rejecting Freud's dream theory:
A. Depreciation through value judgment 1 . Ridicule and mockery
2. Rejection on moral grounds 3. Denial of validity
B. Denial of scientific character of theory 1 . Questioning analyst's sincerity 2. Questioning verification of theory 3 . Questioning methodology
C. Exposure of social status of theory 1 . Disagreement among experts 2. Fashionableness
3. Lack of originality
This scheme looks more like the outline for a paper than a coding scheme. But given that it has been published as a system of categories, one interpretation could be that it defines but one variable consisting of nine values, A 1 , A2, .. . , through C3, with a merely convenient grouping of these values into A, B, and C kinds that could aid conceptualizing these nine values, without having any other descriptive significance. A second interpretation is that there are three variables (A, B, and C) with three values ( 1 , 2, and 3 ) each, defined differently for each variable. This interpretation would suggest that the researchers regarded the arguments against Freud's dream theory as having a valuational, scientific, and social dimension. A third interpretation is that there are nine variables whose values are present and absent, with the breakdown into A, B, and C providing three convenient conceptual contexts for their definitions.
Readers of content analysis research may find important clues to the data lan
guage in use by examining how data are treated. An invariant organization of the data suggests constants. Variables, by contrast, vary, allowing coders to express different kinds of observations or readings. Separate judgments suggest separate variables. Inasmuch as the mutually exclusive values of a coding instru
ment partition a sample into mutually exclusive sets of units, the summing of frequencies to a total always points to the mutual exclusivity of values or com
binations of values. Several ways of summing frequencies suggest independent
DATA LAN G UAG ES
variables-in cross-tabulations, for example. In the example of coding for Freud's dream theory, a careful reading of Herma et al.'s report of their study reveals the first of the three interpretations offered above to be correct, only because the frequencies reported for the nine values sum up to 1 0 0 % . The group
ing into A, B, and C, defined within the same variable, allowed the researchers to lump findings into simpler categories later. This, however, is not evident from their published conceptual scheme.
There have been unfortunate misunderstandings among content analysts and sometimes even resistance to being clear about the data language employed. For example, in interactive-hermeneutic explorations of texts, specifically when the researchers are using computer-aided text analysis software (see Chapter 12, section 12.6), coders are given considerable freedom to highlight any relevant por
tions of a document and to assign any number of codes to them (see Figure 8 . 1 ) .
1 59
Ponty (1962), Bakhtin (1981. 1986), and VoloshirlOv, (1986), amongst others, that the character oftbe spontaneously occurring.
background fortnS of participatory undemanding, occurring routinely within our everyday conversational activities, has come to our intellectual attention. Like fish being the last to discover water, the great power of Wittgenstein's 'philosophy' (if we feel it can �till be caned philosophy) lies in his outlining of a set of methods that enable us to come to an understanding of the nature of our own human 'doings' from within the middle of our doing of them. He thus describes the nature of his philorophical illvesligaions as follows: "What we are supplying arc really remarks on the natural history of human beings: we are not [j:��en���li��:ays·�·n
i��'�;::e�o
0��u�tire�:Y��.�2::v�· (�:�:�4��;l�l.
';u�bOO�,
;�;,:��.:!s;o��P\h�Wh�, i�����,o�i;�:'�f :�,,�,���t��'�a�t�!������:i W�t�����hk�r:�;.e�,;���a��d�thi���:����'f��Yo w�nli��hbec�o.�,·.�'��.��o:"�Y,=.
J-�---
amatter, aimed outwards toward helping us to become more actively rclated to subtle, previously unnoticed aspects of our surroundings in the present moment, rather than inwards toward thinking, prior to any aclion, as what features we should approach or address in our inquiries. This, clearly is a very different kind of goal from the theoretical goals pursued in the classical, metaphysical philosophies of the past. Instead of providing preliminary theories or model� a� to the nature of the world around us and our knowledge of it, his aim is to alert us to what in actual fact is occurring in uur own involvt:mt:nt� with each other, and with our �urroUJrlings, which make such theorizing possible. Thus his kind of philosophy "sinlply puts everything before us, ami nt:ither explam� nor deuuce� anything. mce everyt !JIg les open to VICW t or w at IS hidden, fllr example, i, Ilf no interest to us. Onc might gIVe t e name p I usop Y to w at IS pos.<'WtC Ie ore a new ISC(lVenes and inventlOns" (no.126)
And it i, preCl.,>ely thl� that I will try to e;o;plore further below. For, as we shall sec, common both to action research and to the conduct of classical (e;o;perimcnt and theory based) scientific research, is a realm of creative human a�tivity to do with the possible establishing of new human communities. Within this sphere, people develop, not only new way� of relating them'elHs to each other, but also U.'> a result. new ways of relating themselves to all the other othemesses in their surroundillg� as well. Thus central in this realm, although so far very link e;o;amined in the philosophy of science, is thc choice of what we might call the styles of addrcss adopted by memhers of a rc'earch community, both to each other and to the othernesses constitlltllli' the ,uhJect matter of their re�earch.
g
�b
� C
In this respect, Kuhn (1<J70) has noted rhat, prior to the conducting of the relevant experimental manipliialion� and the observing of their consequent results (or '" the course of such activity), a new scientific community of researchers, all able to communicate in unconfused, nonmisleading ways amongst themselves about unque possibilities not yet actualized, must be estahlished. Hence, he observed: "Effective scientitlc research scarcely begins before-a scientific community thinks it has acquired firm answers to questions like the following: What are the fundamental entitle� of which the universe is composed?
How do these interact with each other and with the senses? What questions may be legitimately be asked about such entities and '- established experimentally rests in fact on particular �et� of suretie5 or l;ertaintic� of practice established prior to, or
progressively clarified in the course of, the relevant research activities - our �cientific truths are grounded in these certainties (Wittgenstein. 1%9).
L --=W::h::"
::''''::h ::"i::q.
::::,,::,=m:::p'=OY='d=,"='=''=k=i"=
' ",='=",=iO=",='I'=O (=K.=h="0='9=7=0 0
=PP=.4=.5=IO='"="=,"="=W=0,=d,=0 '
=h .='=I&=om=
",='''
= th=O=f
�=i='"=tifi="="='"='''
==..Ji '-
�
These sureties or certainties of practice, thc social rootings of our scicntific claims to truth. and the styles of address upon whIch they depend, have, usually remamed III the backglOund unc;o;ammed m our studies of the nature of SCientific research The
d
/
outstandmg praclIcal successes of the natural sclenccs achIeved y-nh very little e;o;ammatlOn of the role of such suretlesl, have mstead been laken as a general guarantee of the efficacy of Its method, As a result we have no way of checkmg whether the sureties of our research practices are in fact as well grounded in reality as we believe.
This leave� us in the p\J�ition or being no more sure as to whether our 'relational c:>:.peri mellt�' in establishing new re�t'arch l'Ommumtles in the natural sciences, are any more ill1eilectually wdl ju�tiht'u than
any of our other 'relational experiments'. Thus, at least in this respe<:t, action rc'>carch would secm �() far to
/
be at lcast as well gro undcd -or more accurately, no less well grounded - thnn our re�carch activities in the natural sClenccs. Indeed. if the initial establishment of a new research communil'!. action research proJect.and what we have learnt" (Bohr, 1963, p.3, quoted in Stapp. 1')72. p.l I06, my lU-r a� much as ill an t:mpha�is)
"' Heiscnberg: I'm a photon. A ljuantum of light. I'm despatched into the darkne�, to find Bohr. And I succeed, hecause I manage to �oJlide with him ... But what's happened? Look- he's been ,loY-cd down. he's been deflected! He's no longer dOIng e;o;actly what he was so maddenly doing before I "alked into him!
1:Iohr: But, Heisenherg, Hei�enberg! You also have been deflected! ... The trouble i, kn(\\,ing "hat', happencd to you!" (FraYIi. 2000, p 69).
Action re,earch 1\ orten criticized etther for not being properly sciemific, or for not being proper re,ealch. or holh (Toulmin. 1<J96). My purpose in this papcr, however, is to show that inquiries in participatory action rc,�arch draw on lh� same processes of human communication and interaction as those in fact uscd in natural sciences, when viewed as unfinished, unsettled research sciences. This is because, prior to, and during the conduct their experimental manipulations and the making of their observations, a community of lICientific researchers must all be able unconfusing ways about uniquely new possibilities notrequires orientation more toward imagining and grasping new possibilities to communicate amongst themselves in nonmisleading, thall toward understanding current actualities, and memher� must fashion between themselves new shared or sharable sense of how they might go on together to act in new ways. in other words, the i�sue here i� not a matter of discovery but of creation .
Figure 8.1 Highlighted and Coded Text Sections
1---1--- e
Subsequent to the coders' work, the qualitative researchers can retrieve, reorganize, and tabulate the coded sections for further examination. Note that in the example in Figure 8 . 1 , the first and second textual units are assigned one code each, a and g, respectively. The third unit is assigned two codes, b and c. That third unit also contains a fourth unit that is assigned the code d. If all the high
lighted text segments were as separate as the first two units, their codes could be treated as the values of a variable. In this case, a, b, c, and d are all binary variables, not categories in the technical sense.
Because overlapping units cannot be enumerated, quantitative researchers shy away from double coding. In contrast, qualitative researchers find uniform unitizations irresponsive to the nature of the texts they study, and so they shy away from more formal analyses. Both attitudes limit the analysis of textual matter, which often is complex in structure. However, when an analyst treats each code as a binary variable (i.e., either present or absent) and keeps references to the beginnings and ends of the highlighted text (on the reliability of unitizing, see Chapter 1 1, section 11.6), this constitutes a data language that would enable the analyst to correlate these codes and apply more complex analyses. In Figure 8.1, the third highlighted text seg
ment would contribute to a correlation between b and c, and the overlapping text segments would count toward correlations between b and d, between c and d, and between d and e. As the highlighting and coding of text is implemented in a com
puter, there are no ambiguities or inconsistencies. By being clear about the data lan
guages by which data are created from raw text, researchers can enrich content analysis research and encourage the development of suitable analytical techniques.
The values of variables may be unordered or ordered, and, in the latter case, they may exhibit one of several metrics. Ordering refers to a system of relation
ships between the values of a variable, determining which pairs of values are neighbors. For example, in a hierarchy, one value neighbors several other values that are not neighbors of each other, and each of the latter may neighbor other values that are not neighbors of each other either, and so forth, until all values are so ordered. In a chain, each value has two neighbors, except for the values at the beginning and end of the chain, which have one neighbor each.
Metrics define quantitative differences between all pairs of values in a variable.
We distinguish several kinds of metrics according to the mathematical operations applicable to these differences. Thus two dollar amounts may be added or subtracted, representing the experience of earning or spending, but addition and subtraction would not make sense when the values to be compared are qualitative attributes such as individuals' emotional states, citizenship, or occupation. When qualitative attributes are expressed numerically-telephone numbers, Social Security numbers, the numbers on the jerseys of basketball players
addition and subtraction are mathematically possible but do not make sense semantically. Being concerned here only with the syntax of data languages, I dis
tinguish among the possible metrics of variables by the operations that are applic
able to their values. The metric of money differs from the metric of telephone numbers, for example. I will start with the simplest of all variables whose values are unordered and do not have a metric-nominal variables-and then introduce several orderings and several metrics.