5.3 The participants
5.3.4 The interview engaged
When coding In Vivo, I was coding for parts of data which were speaking directly to the experience of placeness through the alternates of movement, rest, and encounter. What I mean here is that I was coding those parts of the data which dealt specifically with the questions I had asked and I dealt with them in ways which sometimes engaged the theory and greater literature which had encouraged my questioning (refer to Auerbach and Silverstein, 2003;
Charmaz, 2006; Saldana, 2013). Such coding seeks to lay out the data which might help with unpacking the anchors of the theory utilised and how this theory will at points be experienced as a lived experience.
There is also the need to sometimes count the codes which have come out of the data so as to see their utility in tracing out the overall experience of a phenomenon (see Friese, 2012:73).
Since I was using In Vivo Coding for the transcripts, from the initial coding of just 2 transcripts (participants Kabomo and Baraka) I ended up with some 242 unique codes. This number is relatively high for a codes’ selection (refer to Gibbs, 2002; Lichtman, 2012:194; Cresswell and
107 | P a g e Poth, 2017). These codes were dealing with the various ways in which the participants were reflecting upon the phenomenon as I asked of them through my questioning. The total number of pages I had coded was 314.
It is important to note that with each passing transcript that is coded, the total unique number of codes added decreases (refer to MacQueen, 2009:218; Saldana, 2013). The transcripts were edited so as to have remaining untouched just those parts of the transcripts infused with codes (see Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Rallis and Rossman, 2003; Grbich, 2007; Cresswell, 2013). What I mean here is that from the data coded progressively there is a decreasing increment of new codes which cannot be directly connected back to some prior codes. It is often helpful here to keep a memo book so as to document instances wherein there might be the mirroring of certain codes through the participants’ reflections. Under such circumstances it is wise to then proceed to the operation of making categories out of collected codes.
Categories are developed from data when the data can -- through its coding -- be grouped. What I mean here is that the codes within the transcripts can be argued to be dealing with a similar topic. For example, a paragraph with such In Vivo codes as “need to start familiarising,” and
“feeling slightly nostalgic,” would fall under the categories “Familiarity” and “Residence”
respectively5. This is because the In Vivo codes’ selection is here arguing for familiarity in such a way that it also looks at how residence has affected its very experience. From the categorising – the further reduction of the data from codes to categories -- I ended up with 13 categories6.
Categorising the data allowed me to look at how the participants reflected on a topic. In other words, the participants’ reflections ended up having a sort of collection of mixtures of categories that will sometimes be the same and thus can be thought of as discussing similar instances -- from different participants -- of the essence of reflection (refer to Lincoln and Guba, 1985:347; Denzin and Lincoln, 2002; Bernard, 2011). For instance, the combinations of
5 Refer to Appendix C: Categories Emerging
6 Refer to Appendix D: Categories and Definitions
108 | P a g e categories that are “Familiarity + Time + Contest” from both the participants Kabomo and Greta are closely related as they are made up of codes discussing a similar experience.
I then re-read the reflections as coded and categorised. I returned to the concerned quotes in their entirety to read them again and again (refer to Poland, 1995; Wolcott, 1999:13). I did this so that I could see the utility of categorising a reflection in a particular manner. This also allowed me to see how exactly a particular reflection was communicated to me and in such a way I was able to see how similar or dissimilar reflections are -- sometimes looking at mirrored mixtures of codes to see whether they do or do not really discuss an experience in the same manner.
I then engaged in second cycle coding whereby I now looked to reflections from all the transcripts which might have been the same or closely related mixtures of categories and from this I highlighted further the way in which the essence of an experience was being communicated to me by the participants (see Bazeley, 2009; Saldana, 2013:213) – essentially, participants’ reflections were being coagulated into themes. What I mean here is that the mixtures of categories were such that the reflections could be separated so as to be visible as different ways of talking about a particular category (refer to Dey, 1999:70; Charmaz, 2006).
For instance, the category mixtures “Aesthetics + Residence + Contest” and “Aesthetics + Comparison” are two ways in which aesthetics are engaged by the participants. In the former instance the participants are talking about contestation over aesthetics whereas in the latter the participants are talking about comparisons of aesthetics.
This procedure yielded nine main themes and 12 subthemes. These nine main themes and 12 subthemes were the main ways in which the essence of experience was communicated by the participants (Charmaz, 2006:54). Within these themes there were obviously subthemes as these were brought about through the earlier categorisation which in essence was a highlighting of how a reflection was experienced by the participant communicating it to me (refer to Saldana, 2013:213).
109 | P a g e Table 11: Themes and Subthemes
Theme Subtheme
Aesthetics Comparative Aesthetic
Aesthetic Contestation
People Social interaction and signalling
Social interaction and social connections
Safety Comparative Safety
Routine
Walking Point A to point B
Convenience Notice
Familiarity Locational Familiarity
Residence-based familiarity
Comfort Comfort and the built environment
Comfort and the people environment Attachment
At Homeness
Themes and subthemes as emerging from the coding of data.
Lastly, in dealing with the coded quotes, I decided on which quotes to include in the analysis chapters as exemplar quotes – quotes in the words of the participants which would best exemplify the argument under construction. The quotes were proceeding from those with the least number of themes and categories within single reflections to those with the most number of themes and categories. In total I had 57 pages of this progression of quotes from least complex to more complex. I included in the dissertation those quotes which I felt captured most effectively the essences of reflection.
The last procedure I did with the essences of the experience as communicated through themes was to examine the themes through the lens of one of the theories that I was using to look at
110 | P a g e the overall experience of place. The themes proved to be rather susceptible to being aggregated under the theorising of the place ballet. I was able to group the results of the inductive processes of data coding under the place ballet anchors of movement, rest, and encounter. This allowed for a more well-structured analysis. For instance, under the place ballet concept of “movement”
I could easily put the themes Routine, Familiarity, and Walking as they were closely related to the idea of Movement as advanced by David Seamon.
Ultimately, the interviews were engaged extensively through detailed processes of qualitative data coding. These rigorous processes allowed me to highlight the anchors of experience as communicated by the participants. In other words, coding was a way to lay out the different parts in which the experience was taken in and understood by the individual participant experiencing it. From such an operation the essences are laid bare in their most truthful manner, allowing me to better document and appreciate the essence of the experience of Rhodes University as a place through the alternating realities of movement, rest, and encounter as so influenced by routine walking.