ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Software Tool Article

WordCommentsAnalyzer: A windows software tool for qualitative research

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 03 May 2018
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

There is a lack of free software that provides a professional and smooth experience in text editing and markup for qualitative data analysis. Word processing software like Microsoft Word provides a good editing experience, allowing the researcher to effortlessly add comments to text portions. However, organizing the keywords and categories in the comments can become a more difficult task when the amount of data increases. We present WordCommentsAnalyzer, a software tool that is written in C# using .NET Framework and OpenXml, which helps a qualitative researcher to organize codes when using Microsoft Word as the primary text markup software. WordCommentsAnalyzer provides an effective user interface to count codes, to organize codes in a code hierarchy, and to see various data extracts belonging to each code. We illustrate how to use the software by conducting a preliminary content analysis on Tweets with the #successfulaging hashtag. We hope this open-source software will facilitate qualitative data analysis by researchers who are interested in using Word for this purpose.

Keywords

Computer assisted qualitative data analysis software, Microsoft Word, comments, coding, thematic analysis, code hierarchy tree

Introduction

Commercial qualitative data analysis (QDA) software tools such as NVivo and Atlas.ti seem to be the most popular in the qualitative research community1. However, learning to use these complex software tools may be inconvenient for some researchers. Moreover, the purchase of commercial QDA software may not be affordable for some researchers. On the other hand, free or open-source solutions that are available often do not provide a smooth editing and markup experience (e.g., QDA Miner Lite does not support Persian and Arabic languages; CATMA and CAT2 are not fast due to their web-based nature). For these reasons, some researchers use professional word processing programs for their qualitative research projects.

The use of Microsoft Word for QDA is commonly documented3,4. Using Word comments provides a straightforward way to annotate specific portions of the text and attach keywords or categories (codes) to them. However, as the amount of data grows, organizing codes in Word comments becomes an exhausting task.

In this article, we present WordCommentsAnalyzer, a free, open-source tool that makes it possible for qualitative researchers to automate organization of the qualitative codes through a fast and easy-to-learn user interface while coding the textual material using Microsoft Word as a professional, familiar word procesing software.

Methods

Implementation

This software is written in C# programming language using .NET Framework 4.5.2. The software also makes use of OpenXml library to extract comments from Word documents. Recent versions of Word store documents in XML format. OpenXml provides an easy way to query comments from a document. To facilitate assigning multiple codes to a piece of text, we assume a simple convention: different codes are entered in a comment with line breaks between them (as the descendant paragraphs of the comment element). The software uses a relational model approach to store the extracted codes and uses language integrated queries to collect different text portions related to each code, to calculate the code frequencies and to sort the codes by frequency. The visual interface of the program consists of three side-by-side panels (Figure 1). The left panel shows the codes in the comments with their counts, the middle one provides a code tree that the user can intuitively organize their codes in and the right panel shows the data extracts pertaining to each code. In the left panel, the code list can be filtered to find specific codes. The user can place codes in the code hierarchy simply by using drag-and-drop. The tree also enables the user to move codes in the hierarchy if needed. The user can introduce a new parent code or a code that is of a higher level of abstraction. Additionally, the codes are changed or combined by being wrapped in new codes. The code hierarchy tree is saved as a tab-indented text file in the data folder (codehierarchy.txt). The tree is auto-saved every minute and can also be manually saved by clicking a save button in the interface. The previous tree files are backed up in a subfolder of the data folder.

b2249fd5-58a9-40fb-b897-d149762c2938_figure1.gif

Figure 1. An illustration of the three side-by-side panels of the WordCommentsAnalyzer user interface.

The left panel shows the codes in the comments with their counts, the middle panel provides a code tree for intuitive organization of the codes and the right panel shows the data extracts pertaining to each code (or to children of a parent code). The code list in the left panel can be filtered to find specific codes. The user can place codes in the code hierarchy simply by using drag-and-drop. The tree also enables the user to move codes in the hierarchy if needed. The user can introduce a new parent code. The codes are changed or combined by being wrapped in new codes.

Operation

The requirements for this software are Windows 7 or later and .NET Framework 4.5.2. After installing the .NET Framework, the user can unzip the release package from the GitHub link and run the “WordCommentsAnalyzer.exe” executable file. The program supports XML Word documents (using the .docx extension). Older Word documents (using the .doc extension) can be easily converted to XML documents by Word 2003 or later (there are also resources available on the web to batch-convert older Word documents). The program allows multiple Word files to be analyzed. This feature can be utilized to separate transcripts of different interview or focus group sessions into different files.

Use case

To illustrate how to use the software, we present a mini-study of Twitter’s Tweets from 17 January 2017 to 10 April 2018. The Tweets with the #successfulaging hashtag were copied into two Word documents based on the year in which the Tweets were posted (Supplementary File 1). We reviewed the Tweets and added comments (line-break-separated codes) to portions of texts containing interesting notions related to successful aging. Two examples of these text portions are reproduced in Figure 2.

b2249fd5-58a9-40fb-b897-d149762c2938_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Two text samples of #successfulaging Tweets, which are commented using line-break-separated codes.

The codes describe notable topics concerning the text samples.

After adding comments to Word documents, we run WordCommentsAnalyzer, select the folder containing the Word documents and click the Analyze button. The program analyzes the comments and shows a list of codes with their counts in the left panel. The middle panel enables us to organize the codes by placing them in a code hierarchy (Figure 3). For example, we can find a number of codes related to health by filtering the code list by the word of “health”. Then we add the code of “Health”, which is a parent code, to the hierarchy by dragging and dropping it onto the root node of “Code Hierarchy”. The codes of “Brain health”, “Physical health”, and “Health care” can then be drag-and-dropped onto the node of “Health”. Likewise, “Oral health” is inserted into “Physical health”. When organizing the codes, we could check the right panel to assure the data extracts support the codes. Also, the codes inserted into the hierarchy will be highlighted in the code list to help keep track of the organized codes.

b2249fd5-58a9-40fb-b897-d149762c2938_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Features in the left and middle panels of the WordCommentsAnalyzer user interface.

The user can find specific codes by filtering the code list (e.g., by the word of “health”) and organize the codes (from the left panel) by dragging and dropping them into the code hierarchy tree (the right panel).

Figure 4 presents a formatted version of codehierarchy.txt (Supplementary File 2) when we organized the Tweet codes with at least two counts. As shown in this figure, the themes of health, retirement, happiness and being active represent the richest themes in the Tweets of #successful aging.

b2249fd5-58a9-40fb-b897-d149762c2938_figure4.gif

Figure 4. A formatted version of tab-indented text output file of the code hierarchy tree.

When we organized the Tweet codes with at least two counts. The large branches of the code tree can help the researcher identify the richest themes in the data. Thus, themes of health, retirement, happiness, and being active are probably the major themes in the Tweets with the hashtag #successfulaging.

Conclusion

This article presents a Windows software tool for organizing comments in Word documents. WordCommentsAnalyzer facilitates organizing codes in a code hierarchy for qualitative researchers who are interested in using Word documents to annotate their data.

Software availability

Source code available from: https://github.com/ehsabd/word-comments-analyzer.

Archived source code at time of publication: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12286045.

License: GNU General Public License 3.0.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 03 May 2018
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Abdekhodaie E, Hatami J, Bahrami Ehsan H and Kormi-Nouri R. WordCommentsAnalyzer: A windows software tool for qualitative research [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2018, 7:536 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.14819.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 03 May 2018
Views
30
Cite
Reviewer Report 02 Aug 2018
Yazdan Mansourian, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW, Australia 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 30
This article reports an overall description about developing a free and open source software designed for qualitative data analysis. This software assists researchers to organise and categorise the initial codes they create through data analysis process in various qualitative methods ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Mansourian Y. Reviewer Report For: WordCommentsAnalyzer: A windows software tool for qualitative research [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2018, 7:536 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.16128.r36504)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 04 Sep 2018
    Ehsan Abdekhodaie, Department of Psychology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
    04 Sep 2018
    Author Response
    We thank Dr. Mansourian for his valuable comments about our manuscript/software. The comments surely helped us improve both the software and the manuscript.

    Some aspects of the software have ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 04 Sep 2018
    Ehsan Abdekhodaie, Department of Psychology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
    04 Sep 2018
    Author Response
    We thank Dr. Mansourian for his valuable comments about our manuscript/software. The comments surely helped us improve both the software and the manuscript.

    Some aspects of the software have ... Continue reading
Views
35
Cite
Reviewer Report 11 Jun 2018
Ronggui Huang, Department of Sociology, Fudan University, Shanghai, China 
Approved
VIEWS 35
Various QDA software provide similar functionalities in terms of coding operations and organization of codes, for instance, RQDA (http://rqda.r-forge.r-project.org/), WeftQDA (https://www.pressure.to/qda/), Py3QDA (https://github.com/Ronggui/PyQDA/), among others.  A more systematic comparison of existing tools and WordCommentsAnalyzer will provide a clear picture on ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Huang R. Reviewer Report For: WordCommentsAnalyzer: A windows software tool for qualitative research [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2018, 7:536 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.16128.r34052)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 04 Sep 2018
    Ehsan Abdekhodaie, Department of Psychology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
    04 Sep 2018
    Author Response
    We would like to thank Dr. Huang for reviewing our software/manuscript and for his kind comments about the potential value this software provides. Here we respond to the reviewer‘s comments ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 04 Sep 2018
    Ehsan Abdekhodaie, Department of Psychology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
    04 Sep 2018
    Author Response
    We would like to thank Dr. Huang for reviewing our software/manuscript and for his kind comments about the potential value this software provides. Here we respond to the reviewer‘s comments ... Continue reading

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 03 May 2018
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.