The Art of Coding: Descriptive and In Vivo
In my previous blog, I wrapped up by mentioning that I would start working on actually finding and analyzing primary and secondary sources. Before I get into the different types of sources I have found, I want to explain what I plan to do with any primary or secondary source I find. Essentially, I want to discuss how I plan to find different themes in my research through coding. So, what exactly is coding? Johnny Saldana explains in “The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers” that coding is the process of labeling and organizing qualitative data to identify different themes and patterns. Think of coding as a way to break down a vast amount of data into manageable and meaningful pieces to make sense of what they are. As I was reading, I also found out that there are different types of codes: Descriptive and In Vivo.
Descriptive coding is where we summarize in a word or short phrase – most often as a noun – the basic topic of a passage of qualitative data. The main purpose of descriptive coding is to give a category of information to a segment of text. This makes it easier to compare and analyze different categories across sources. For example, let’s say I’m reading a speech by Subhas Chandra Bose, and in one of the passages, Bose mentions complete independence from British rule. So, I would simply code this passage as “Advocacy for Independence.” As I go through all my other primary and secondary sources, I would code a passage “Advocacy for Independence” if it has something to do with independence from British rule. So, when I come back, descriptive coding can help me see if this code is prevalent in other sources and also help understand the context of the theme in INA propaganda.
In Vivo coding, on the other hand, does not summarize; instead, the codes are directly derived from an author’s own words. In Vivo coding maintains the cultural and linguistic integrity of the subject’s speech and written words. This method is really helpful in preserving the author’s perspective, emotions, and cultural context because we don’t assign a word or phrase to their phrase. An example of In Vivo coding can be a powerful and frequently repeated phrase such as “Give me Blood, and I shall give you freedom” by Subhas Chandra Bose. Unlike Descriptive coding, In Vivo would be really useful for me when I’m comparing contemporary literature to INA propaganda. For instance, if I find the exact words in contemporary political rhetoric, I can trace the influence of INA’s original message in modern political ideology and strategy. I can use In Vivo coding to see how a phrase such as “Give me blood…give you freedom” is used within the current political context – whether to evoke patriotism, mobilize support, or link contemporary political objectives with the historical struggle for independence by the INA.
Next week, I plan on continuing my coding of primary and secondary sources for both contemporary political rhetoric and INA propaganda. As I’m looking back now, I realize I haven’t really explained what propaganda is, and I don’t want to crowd this blog. So, in my next blog, I will introduce propaganda and why it is important to focus on it. I am also going to start writing my results section in the next week after I finalize my analysis of the themes I find.