Rightnote and Evernote

Posted by Dr Andus
Apr 17, 2013 at 11:34 PM

WSP wrote:
>May I offer a somewhat cynical dissent about “synthesis” (which seems to
>be increasingly the Holy Grail of this forum)? There are certain kinds
>of data that lend themselves to analysis through a spreadsheet or a
>heavy-duty database program, but the sort of information that I collect
>—mainly historical and literary in nature—really can only be
>interpreted by the human mind. I like a two-pane program because it
>makes simple hierarchical relationships clear, and through cross-linking
>and tags I can work out other connections. But the interpretation of
>what it all means (i.e. its synthesis) is a strenuous intellectual task
>that I’m not prepared to outsource to any software.

Sure, but a software tool can still help you with a) analysis and b) synthesis of qualitative information, especially when it becomes a huge mass of qualitative data (which is the issue here) and when the work might need to be carried out at multiple sites.

Analysis is usually done with granularising (breaking up text, cloning etc,), tagging, categorising, ordering hierarchically, then ordering the tags, categories etc. themselves. Multiple search options facilitate this process. Producing customised reports of the results of analysis is also helpful. Linking items (and to other files etc.) can be used both as parts of analysis and synthesis. Tools for abstracting conclusions would be required.

Synthesis then could be understood as rearranging the material (or the findings it yields) into a new shape, once one is informed by the results of the analysis, possibly to answer a central question or to make a new point or create a new piece of work. Synthesis would require having good visualisation options of the analysis results, ability to rearrange hierarchies easily, link items in a new arrangement, and generally produce the new work.

Professional qualitative data analysis (CAQDAS) software now address many of these issues, though not equally well. The tools we seem to be discussing on these forums tend to focus on (specialise in) some sub-aspects of these CAQDAS tools (and often do them better), but individually lack the integration of analysis, reporting, and synthesis that CAQDAS tools have.

I wish the two worlds (academic CAQDAS tools and the world of PIM, outliners, note-takers etc.) would borrow ideas from each other more..