how to interpret data in thesis

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Data Interpretation: Definition and Steps with Examples

A good data interpretation process is key to making your data usable. It will help you make sure you’re drawing the correct conclusions and acting on your information.

No matter what, data is everywhere in the modern world. There are two groups and organizations: those drowning in data or not using it appropriately and those benefiting.

In this blog, you will learn the definition of data interpretation and its primary steps and examples.

What is Data Interpretation

Data interpretation is the process of reviewing data and arriving at relevant conclusions using various analytical research methods. Data analysis assists researchers in categorizing, manipulating data , and summarizing data to answer critical questions.

LEARN ABOUT: Level of Analysis

In business terms, the interpretation of data is the execution of various processes. This process analyzes and revises data to gain insights and recognize emerging patterns and behaviors. These conclusions will assist you as a manager in making an informed decision based on numbers while having all of the facts at your disposal.

Importance of Data Interpretation

Raw data is useless unless it’s interpreted. Data interpretation is important to businesses and people. The collected data helps make informed decisions.

Make better decisions

Any decision is based on the information that is available at the time. People used to think that many diseases were caused by bad blood, which was one of the four humors. So, the solution was to get rid of the bad blood. We now know that things like viruses, bacteria, and immune responses can cause illness and can act accordingly.

In the same way, when you know how to collect and understand data well, you can make better decisions. You can confidently choose a path for your organization or even your life instead of working with assumptions.

The most important thing is to follow a transparent process to reduce mistakes and tiredness when making decisions.

Find trends and take action

Another practical use of data interpretation is to get ahead of trends before they reach their peak. Some people have made a living by researching industries, spotting trends, and then making big bets on them.

LEARN ABOUT: Action Research

With the proper data interpretations and a little bit of work, you can catch the start of trends and use them to help your business or yourself grow. 

Better resource allocation

The last importance of data interpretation we will discuss is the ability to use people, tools, money, etc., more efficiently. For example, If you know via strong data interpretation that a market is underserved, you’ll go after it with more energy and win.

In the same way, you may find out that a market you thought was a good fit is actually bad. This could be because the market is too big for your products to serve, there is too much competition, or something else.

No matter what, you can move the resources you need faster and better to get better results.

What are the steps in interpreting data?

Here are some steps to interpreting data correctly.

Gather the data

The very first step in data interpretation is gathering all relevant data. You can do this by first visualizing it in a bar, graph, or pie chart. This step aims to analyze the data accurately and without bias. Now is the time to recall how you conducted your research.

Here are two question patterns that will help you to understand better.

• Were there any flaws or changes that occurred during the data collection process?
• Have you saved any observatory notes or indicators?

You can proceed to the next stage when you have all of your data.

• Develop your discoveries

This is a summary of your findings. Here, you thoroughly examine the data to identify trends, patterns, or behavior. If you are researching a group of people using a sample population, this is the section where you examine behavioral patterns. You can compare these deductions to previous data sets, similar data sets, or general hypotheses in your industry. This step’s goal is to compare these deductions before drawing any conclusions.

• Draw Conclusions

After you’ve developed your findings from your data sets, you can draw conclusions based on your discovered trends. Your findings should address the questions that prompted your research. If they do not respond, inquire about why; it may produce additional research or questions.

LEARN ABOUT: Research Process Steps

• Give recommendations

The interpretation procedure of data comes to a close with this stage. Every research conclusion must include a recommendation. As recommendations are a summary of your findings and conclusions, they should be brief. There are only two options for recommendations; you can either recommend a course of action or suggest additional research.

Data interpretation examples

Here are two examples of data interpretations to help you understand it better:

Let’s say your users fall into four age groups. So a company can see which age group likes their content or product. Based on bar charts or pie charts, they can develop a marketing strategy to reach uninvolved groups or an outreach strategy to grow their core user base.

Another example of data analysis is the use of recruitment CRM by businesses. They utilize it to find candidates, track their progress, and manage their entire hiring process to determine how they can better automate their workflow.

Overall, data interpretation is an essential factor in data-driven decision-making. It should be performed on a regular basis as part of an iterative interpretation process. Investors, developers, and sales and acquisition professionals can benefit from routine data interpretation. It is what you do with those insights that determine the success of your business.

Contact QuestionPro experts if you need assistance conducting research or creating a data analysis. We can walk you through the process and help you make the most of your data.

MORE LIKE THIS

QuestionPro BI: From Research Data to Actionable Dashboards

Apr 22, 2024

21 Best Customer Advocacy Software for Customers in 2024

Apr 19, 2024

10 Quantitative Data Analysis Software for Every Data Scientist

Apr 18, 2024

11 Best Enterprise Feedback Management Software in 2024

Other categories.

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and Questions

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and Questions

Table of Contents

Data Interpretation

Definition :

Data interpretation refers to the process of making sense of data by analyzing and drawing conclusions from it. It involves examining data in order to identify patterns, relationships, and trends that can help explain the underlying phenomena being studied. Data interpretation can be used to make informed decisions and solve problems across a wide range of fields, including business, science, and social sciences.

Data Interpretation Process

Here are the steps involved in the data interpretation process:

• Define the research question : The first step in data interpretation is to clearly define the research question. This will help you to focus your analysis and ensure that you are interpreting the data in a way that is relevant to your research objectives.
• Collect the data: The next step is to collect the data. This can be done through a variety of methods such as surveys, interviews, observation, or secondary data sources.
• Clean and organize the data : Once the data has been collected, it is important to clean and organize it. This involves checking for errors, inconsistencies, and missing data. Data cleaning can be a time-consuming process, but it is essential to ensure that the data is accurate and reliable.
• Analyze the data: The next step is to analyze the data. This can involve using statistical software or other tools to calculate summary statistics, create graphs and charts, and identify patterns in the data.
• Interpret the results: Once the data has been analyzed, it is important to interpret the results. This involves looking for patterns, trends, and relationships in the data. It also involves drawing conclusions based on the results of the analysis.
• Communicate the findings : The final step is to communicate the findings. This can involve creating reports, presentations, or visualizations that summarize the key findings of the analysis. It is important to communicate the findings in a way that is clear and concise, and that is tailored to the audience’s needs.

Types of Data Interpretation

There are various types of data interpretation techniques used for analyzing and making sense of data. Here are some of the most common types:

Descriptive Interpretation

This type of interpretation involves summarizing and describing the key features of the data. This can involve calculating measures of central tendency (such as mean, median, and mode), measures of dispersion (such as range, variance, and standard deviation), and creating visualizations such as histograms, box plots, and scatterplots.

Inferential Interpretation

This type of interpretation involves making inferences about a larger population based on a sample of the data. This can involve hypothesis testing, where you test a hypothesis about a population parameter using sample data, or confidence interval estimation, where you estimate a range of values for a population parameter based on sample data.

Predictive Interpretation

This type of interpretation involves using data to make predictions about future outcomes. This can involve building predictive models using statistical techniques such as regression analysis, time-series analysis, or machine learning algorithms.

Exploratory Interpretation

This type of interpretation involves exploring the data to identify patterns and relationships that were not previously known. This can involve data mining techniques such as clustering analysis, principal component analysis, or association rule mining.

Causal Interpretation

This type of interpretation involves identifying causal relationships between variables in the data. This can involve experimental designs, such as randomized controlled trials, or observational studies, such as regression analysis or propensity score matching.

Data Interpretation Methods

There are various methods for data interpretation that can be used to analyze and make sense of data. Here are some of the most common methods:

Statistical Analysis

This method involves using statistical techniques to analyze the data. Statistical analysis can involve descriptive statistics (such as measures of central tendency and dispersion), inferential statistics (such as hypothesis testing and confidence interval estimation), and predictive modeling (such as regression analysis and time-series analysis).

Data Visualization

This method involves using visual representations of the data to identify patterns and trends. Data visualization can involve creating charts, graphs, and other visualizations, such as heat maps or scatterplots.

Text Analysis

This method involves analyzing text data, such as survey responses or social media posts, to identify patterns and themes. Text analysis can involve techniques such as sentiment analysis, topic modeling, and natural language processing.

Machine Learning

This method involves using algorithms to identify patterns in the data and make predictions or classifications. Machine learning can involve techniques such as decision trees, neural networks, and random forests.

Qualitative Analysis

This method involves analyzing non-numeric data, such as interviews or focus group discussions, to identify themes and patterns. Qualitative analysis can involve techniques such as content analysis, grounded theory, and narrative analysis.

Geospatial Analysis

This method involves analyzing spatial data, such as maps or GPS coordinates, to identify patterns and relationships. Geospatial analysis can involve techniques such as spatial autocorrelation, hot spot analysis, and clustering.

Applications of Data Interpretation

Data interpretation has a wide range of applications across different fields, including business, healthcare, education, social sciences, and more. Here are some examples of how data interpretation is used in different applications:

• Business : Data interpretation is widely used in business to inform decision-making, identify market trends, and optimize operations. For example, businesses may analyze sales data to identify the most popular products or customer demographics, or use predictive modeling to forecast demand and adjust pricing accordingly.
• Healthcare : Data interpretation is critical in healthcare for identifying disease patterns, evaluating treatment effectiveness, and improving patient outcomes. For example, healthcare providers may use electronic health records to analyze patient data and identify risk factors for certain diseases or conditions.
• Education : Data interpretation is used in education to assess student performance, identify areas for improvement, and evaluate the effectiveness of instructional methods. For example, schools may analyze test scores to identify students who are struggling and provide targeted interventions to improve their performance.
• Social sciences : Data interpretation is used in social sciences to understand human behavior, attitudes, and perceptions. For example, researchers may analyze survey data to identify patterns in public opinion or use qualitative analysis to understand the experiences of marginalized communities.
• Sports : Data interpretation is increasingly used in sports to inform strategy and improve performance. For example, coaches may analyze performance data to identify areas for improvement or use predictive modeling to assess the likelihood of injuries or other risks.

When to use Data Interpretation

Data interpretation is used to make sense of complex data and to draw conclusions from it. It is particularly useful when working with large datasets or when trying to identify patterns or trends in the data. Data interpretation can be used in a variety of settings, including scientific research, business analysis, and public policy.

In scientific research, data interpretation is often used to draw conclusions from experiments or studies. Researchers use statistical analysis and data visualization techniques to interpret their data and to identify patterns or relationships between variables. This can help them to understand the underlying mechanisms of their research and to develop new hypotheses.

In business analysis, data interpretation is used to analyze market trends and consumer behavior. Companies can use data interpretation to identify patterns in customer buying habits, to understand market trends, and to develop marketing strategies that target specific customer segments.

In public policy, data interpretation is used to inform decision-making and to evaluate the effectiveness of policies and programs. Governments and other organizations use data interpretation to track the impact of policies and programs over time, to identify areas where improvements are needed, and to develop evidence-based policy recommendations.

In general, data interpretation is useful whenever large amounts of data need to be analyzed and understood in order to make informed decisions.

Data Interpretation Examples

Here are some real-time examples of data interpretation:

• Social media analytics : Social media platforms generate vast amounts of data every second, and businesses can use this data to analyze customer behavior, track sentiment, and identify trends. Data interpretation in social media analytics involves analyzing data in real-time to identify patterns and trends that can help businesses make informed decisions about marketing strategies and customer engagement.
• Healthcare analytics: Healthcare organizations use data interpretation to analyze patient data, track outcomes, and identify areas where improvements are needed. Real-time data interpretation can help healthcare providers make quick decisions about patient care, such as identifying patients who are at risk of developing complications or adverse events.
• Financial analysis: Real-time data interpretation is essential for financial analysis, where traders and analysts need to make quick decisions based on changing market conditions. Financial analysts use data interpretation to track market trends, identify opportunities for investment, and develop trading strategies.
• Environmental monitoring : Real-time data interpretation is important for environmental monitoring, where data is collected from various sources such as satellites, sensors, and weather stations. Data interpretation helps to identify patterns and trends that can help predict natural disasters, track changes in the environment, and inform decision-making about environmental policies.
• Traffic management: Real-time data interpretation is used for traffic management, where traffic sensors collect data on traffic flow, congestion, and accidents. Data interpretation helps to identify areas where traffic congestion is high, and helps traffic management authorities make decisions about road maintenance, traffic signal timing, and other strategies to improve traffic flow.

Data Interpretation Questions

Data Interpretation Questions samples:

• Medical : What is the correlation between a patient’s age and their risk of developing a certain disease?
• Environmental Science: What is the trend in the concentration of a certain pollutant in a particular body of water over the past 10 years?
• Finance : What is the correlation between a company’s stock price and its quarterly revenue?
• Education : What is the trend in graduation rates for a particular high school over the past 5 years?
• Marketing : What is the correlation between a company’s advertising budget and its sales revenue?
• Sports : What is the trend in the number of home runs hit by a particular baseball player over the past 3 seasons?
• Social Science: What is the correlation between a person’s level of education and their income level?

In order to answer these questions, you would need to analyze and interpret the data using statistical methods, graphs, and other visualization tools.

Purpose of Data Interpretation

The purpose of data interpretation is to make sense of complex data by analyzing and drawing insights from it. The process of data interpretation involves identifying patterns and trends, making comparisons, and drawing conclusions based on the data. The ultimate goal of data interpretation is to use the insights gained from the analysis to inform decision-making.

Data interpretation is important because it allows individuals and organizations to:

• Understand complex data : Data interpretation helps individuals and organizations to make sense of complex data sets that would otherwise be difficult to understand.
• Identify patterns and trends : Data interpretation helps to identify patterns and trends in data, which can reveal important insights about the underlying processes and relationships.
• Make informed decisions: Data interpretation provides individuals and organizations with the information they need to make informed decisions based on the insights gained from the data analysis.
• Evaluate performance : Data interpretation helps individuals and organizations to evaluate their performance over time and to identify areas where improvements can be made.
• Communicate findings: Data interpretation allows individuals and organizations to communicate their findings to others in a clear and concise manner, which is essential for informing stakeholders and making changes based on the insights gained from the analysis.

Characteristics of Data Interpretation

Here are some characteristics of data interpretation:

• Contextual : Data interpretation is always contextual, meaning that the interpretation of data is dependent on the context in which it is analyzed. The same data may have different meanings depending on the context in which it is analyzed.
• Iterative : Data interpretation is an iterative process, meaning that it often involves multiple rounds of analysis and refinement as more data becomes available or as new insights are gained from the analysis.
• Subjective : Data interpretation is often subjective, as it involves the interpretation of data by individuals who may have different perspectives and biases. It is important to acknowledge and address these biases when interpreting data.
• Analytical : Data interpretation involves the use of analytical tools and techniques to analyze and draw insights from data. These may include statistical analysis, data visualization, and other data analysis methods.
• Evidence-based : Data interpretation is evidence-based, meaning that it is based on the data and the insights gained from the analysis. It is important to ensure that the data used in the analysis is accurate, relevant, and reliable.
• Actionable : Data interpretation is actionable, meaning that it provides insights that can be used to inform decision-making and to drive action. The ultimate goal of data interpretation is to use the insights gained from the analysis to improve performance or to achieve specific goals.

Advantages of Data Interpretation

Data interpretation has several advantages, including:

• Improved decision-making: Data interpretation provides insights that can be used to inform decision-making. By analyzing data and drawing insights from it, individuals and organizations can make informed decisions based on evidence rather than intuition.
• Identification of patterns and trends: Data interpretation helps to identify patterns and trends in data, which can reveal important insights about the underlying processes and relationships. This information can be used to improve performance or to achieve specific goals.
• Evaluation of performance: Data interpretation helps individuals and organizations to evaluate their performance over time and to identify areas where improvements can be made. By analyzing data, organizations can identify strengths and weaknesses and make changes to improve their performance.
• Communication of findings: Data interpretation allows individuals and organizations to communicate their findings to others in a clear and concise manner, which is essential for informing stakeholders and making changes based on the insights gained from the analysis.
• Better resource allocation: Data interpretation can help organizations allocate resources more efficiently by identifying areas where resources are needed most. By analyzing data, organizations can identify areas where resources are being underutilized or where additional resources are needed to improve performance.
• Improved competitiveness : Data interpretation can give organizations a competitive advantage by providing insights that help to improve performance, reduce costs, or identify new opportunities for growth.

Limitations of Data Interpretation

Data interpretation has some limitations, including:

• Limited by the quality of data: The quality of data used in data interpretation can greatly impact the accuracy of the insights gained from the analysis. Poor quality data can lead to incorrect conclusions and decisions.
• Subjectivity: Data interpretation can be subjective, as it involves the interpretation of data by individuals who may have different perspectives and biases. This can lead to different interpretations of the same data.
• Limited by analytical tools: The analytical tools and techniques used in data interpretation can also limit the accuracy of the insights gained from the analysis. Different analytical tools may yield different results, and some tools may not be suitable for certain types of data.
• Time-consuming: Data interpretation can be a time-consuming process, particularly for large and complex data sets. This can make it difficult to quickly make decisions based on the insights gained from the analysis.
• Incomplete data: Data interpretation can be limited by incomplete data sets, which may not provide a complete picture of the situation being analyzed. Incomplete data can lead to incorrect conclusions and decisions.
• Limited by context: Data interpretation is always contextual, meaning that the interpretation of data is dependent on the context in which it is analyzed. The same data may have different meanings depending on the context in which it is analyzed.

Difference between Data Interpretation and Data Analysis

Data interpretation and data analysis are two different but closely related processes in data-driven decision-making.

Data analysis refers to the process of examining and examining data using statistical and computational methods to derive insights and conclusions from it. It involves cleaning, transforming, and modeling the data to uncover patterns, relationships, and trends that can help in understanding the underlying phenomena.

Data interpretation, on the other hand, refers to the process of making sense of the findings from the data analysis by contextualizing them within the larger problem domain. It involves identifying the key takeaways from the data analysis, assessing their relevance and significance to the problem at hand, and communicating the insights in a clear and actionable manner.

In short, data analysis is about uncovering insights from the data, while data interpretation is about making sense of those insights and translating them into actionable recommendations.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

• Submit your COVID-19 Pandemic Research
• Research Leap Manual on Academic Writing
• Conduct Your Survey Easily
• Research Tools for Primary and Secondary Research
• Useful and Reliable Article Sources for Researchers
• Tips on writing a Research Paper
• Stuck on Your Thesis Statement?
• Out of the Box
• How to Organize the Format of Your Writing
• Argumentative Versus Persuasive. Comparing the 2 Types of Academic Writing Styles
• Very Quick Academic Writing Tips and Advices
• Top 4 Quick Useful Tips for Your Introduction
• Have You Chosen the Right Topic for Your Research Paper?
• Follow These Easy 8 Steps to Write an Effective Paper
• 7 Errors in your thesis statement
• How do I even Write an Academic Paper?
• Useful Tips for Successful Academic Writing

Collaborative Governance in Government Administration in the Field of State Security Along the Republic of Indonesia (RI)-Malaysia Border Area

It service management system practices in kenya, introduction economic and psychological well-being during covid-19 pandemic in albania, a need for sustainability.

• Designing a Framework for Assessing Agripreneurship Action for the Green Scheme Irrigation Projects, Namibia
• The Potential Utilisation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Enterprises
• Case Study – Developing a National Research and Evidence Base for The Health and Wellbeing Chapter of The Welsh Government’s 2023 Innovation Strategy for Wales
• The Impacts of Technology Innovation on Customer Satisfaction, Employee and Leadership Commitment in CSR Practice
• Current Developments on the Chinese Real Estate Market
• Slide Share

Understanding statistical analysis: A beginner’s guide to data interpretation

Statistical analysis is a crucial part of research in many fields. It is used to analyze data and draw conclusions about the population being studied. However, statistical analysis can be complex and intimidating for beginners. In this article, we will provide a beginner’s guide to statistical analysis and data interpretation, with the aim of helping researchers understand the basics of statistical methods and their application in research.

What is Statistical Analysis?

Statistical analysis is a collection of methods used to analyze data. These methods are used to summarize data, make predictions, and draw conclusions about the population being studied. Statistical analysis is used in a variety of fields, including medicine, social sciences, economics, and more.

Statistical analysis can be broadly divided into two categories: descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics are used to summarize data, while inferential statistics are used to draw conclusions about the population based on a sample of data.

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics are used to summarize data. This includes measures such as the mean, median, mode, and standard deviation. These measures provide information about the central tendency and variability of the data. For example, the mean provides information about the average value of the data, while the standard deviation provides information about the variability of the data.

Inferential Statistics

Inferential statistics are used to draw conclusions about the population based on a sample of data. This involves making inferences about the population based on the sample data. For example, a researcher might use inferential statistics to test whether there is a significant difference between two groups in a study.

Statistical Analysis Techniques

There are many different statistical analysis techniques that can be used in research. Some of the most common techniques include:

Correlation Analysis: This involves analyzing the relationship between two or more variables.

Regression Analysis: This involves analyzing the relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables.

T-Tests: This is a statistical test used to compare the means of two groups.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA): This is a statistical test used to compare the means of three or more groups.

Chi-Square Test: This is a statistical test used to determine whether there is a significant association between two categorical variables.

Data Interpretation

Once data has been analyzed, it must be interpreted. This involves making sense of the data and drawing conclusions based on the results of the analysis. Data interpretation is a crucial part of statistical analysis, as it is used to draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the data.

When interpreting data, it is important to consider the context in which the data was collected. This includes factors such as the sample size, the sampling method, and the population being studied. It is also important to consider the limitations of the data and the statistical methods used.

Best Practices for Statistical Analysis

To ensure that statistical analysis is conducted correctly and effectively, there are several best practices that should be followed. These include:

Clearly define the research question : This is the foundation of the study and will guide the analysis.

Choose appropriate statistical methods: Different statistical methods are appropriate for different types of data and research questions.

Use reliable and valid data: The data used for analysis should be reliable and valid. This means that it should accurately represent the population being studied and be collected using appropriate methods.

Ensure that the data is representative: The sample used for analysis should be representative of the population being studied. This helps to ensure that the results of the analysis are applicable to the population.

Follow ethical guidelines : Researchers should follow ethical guidelines when conducting research. This includes obtaining informed consent from participants, protecting their privacy, and ensuring that the study does not cause harm.

Statistical analysis and data interpretation are essential tools for any researcher. Whether you are conducting research in the social sciences, natural sciences, or humanities, understanding statistical methods and interpreting data correctly is crucial to drawing accurate conclusions and making informed decisions. By following the best practices for statistical analysis and data interpretation outlined in this article, you can ensure that your research is based on sound statistical principles and is therefore more credible and reliable. Remember to start with a clear research question, use appropriate statistical methods, and always interpret your data in context. With these guidelines in mind, you can confidently approach statistical analysis and data interpretation and make meaningful contributions to your field of study.

Suggested Articles

Types of data analysis software In research work, received cluster of results and dispersion in…

How to use quantitative data analysis software   Data analysis differentiates the scientist from the…

Using free research Qualitative Data Analysis Software is a great way to save money, highlight…

Research is a vital part of advancing knowledge in any field, but it must be…

Related Posts

Comments are closed.

A Guide To The Methods, Benefits & Problems of The Interpretation of Data

Table of Contents

1) What Is Data Interpretation?

2) How To Interpret Data?

3) Why Data Interpretation Is Important?

4) Data Interpretation Skills

5) Data Analysis & Interpretation Problems

6) Data Interpretation Techniques & Methods

7) The Use of Dashboards For Data Interpretation

8) Business Data Interpretation Examples

Data analysis and interpretation have now taken center stage with the advent of the digital age… and the sheer amount of data can be frightening. In fact, a Digital Universe study found that the total data supply in 2012 was 2.8 trillion gigabytes! Based on that amount of data alone, it is clear the calling card of any successful enterprise in today’s global world will be the ability to analyze complex data, produce actionable insights, and adapt to new market needs… all at the speed of thought.

Business dashboards are the digital age tools for big data. Capable of displaying key performance indicators (KPIs) for both quantitative and qualitative data analyses, they are ideal for making the fast-paced and data-driven market decisions that push today’s industry leaders to sustainable success. Through the art of streamlined visual communication, data dashboards permit businesses to engage in real-time and informed decision-making and are key instruments in data interpretation. First of all, let’s find a definition to understand what lies behind this practice.

What Is Data Interpretation?

Data interpretation refers to the process of using diverse analytical methods to review data and arrive at relevant conclusions. The interpretation of data helps researchers to categorize, manipulate, and summarize the information in order to answer critical questions.

The importance of data interpretation is evident, and this is why it needs to be done properly. Data is very likely to arrive from multiple sources and has a tendency to enter the analysis process with haphazard ordering. Data analysis tends to be extremely subjective. That is to say, the nature and goal of interpretation will vary from business to business, likely correlating to the type of data being analyzed. While there are several types of processes that are implemented based on the nature of individual data, the two broadest and most common categories are “quantitative and qualitative analysis.”

Yet, before any serious data interpretation inquiry can begin, it should be understood that visual presentations of data findings are irrelevant unless a sound decision is made regarding measurement scales. Before any serious data analysis can begin, the measurement scale must be decided for the data as this will have a long-term impact on data interpretation ROI. The varying scales include:

• Nominal Scale: non-numeric categories that cannot be ranked or compared quantitatively. Variables are exclusive and exhaustive.
• Ordinal Scale: exclusive categories that are exclusive and exhaustive but with a logical order. Quality ratings and agreement ratings are examples of ordinal scales (i.e., good, very good, fair, etc., OR agree, strongly agree, disagree, etc.).
• Interval: a measurement scale where data is grouped into categories with orderly and equal distances between the categories. There is always an arbitrary zero point.
• Ratio: contains features of all three.

For a more in-depth review of scales of measurement, read our article on data analysis questions . Once measurement scales have been selected, it is time to select which of the two broad interpretation processes will best suit your data needs. Let’s take a closer look at those specific methods and possible data interpretation problems.

How To Interpret Data? Top Methods & Techniques

When interpreting data, an analyst must try to discern the differences between correlation, causation, and coincidences, as well as many other biases – but he also has to consider all the factors involved that may have led to a result. There are various data interpretation types and methods one can use to achieve this.

The interpretation of data is designed to help people make sense of numerical data that has been collected, analyzed, and presented. Having a baseline method for interpreting data will provide your analyst teams with a structure and consistent foundation. Indeed, if several departments have different approaches to interpreting the same data while sharing the same goals, some mismatched objectives can result. Disparate methods will lead to duplicated efforts, inconsistent solutions, wasted energy, and inevitably – time and money. In this part, we will look at the two main methods of interpretation of data: qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Qualitative Data Interpretation

Qualitative data analysis can be summed up in one word – categorical. With this type of analysis, data is not described through numerical values or patterns but through the use of descriptive context (i.e., text). Typically, narrative data is gathered by employing a wide variety of person-to-person techniques. These techniques include:

• Observations: detailing behavioral patterns that occur within an observation group. These patterns could be the amount of time spent in an activity, the type of activity, and the method of communication employed.
• Focus groups: Group people and ask them relevant questions to generate a collaborative discussion about a research topic.
• Secondary Research: much like how patterns of behavior can be observed, various types of documentation resources can be coded and divided based on the type of material they contain.
• Interviews: one of the best collection methods for narrative data. Inquiry responses can be grouped by theme, topic, or category. The interview approach allows for highly focused data segmentation.

A key difference between qualitative and quantitative analysis is clearly noticeable in the interpretation stage. The first one is widely open to interpretation and must be “coded” so as to facilitate the grouping and labeling of data into identifiable themes. As person-to-person data collection techniques can often result in disputes pertaining to proper analysis, qualitative data analysis is often summarized through three basic principles: notice things, collect things, and think about things.

After qualitative data has been collected through transcripts, questionnaires, audio and video recordings, or the researcher’s notes, it is time to interpret it. For that purpose, there are some common methods used by researchers and analysts.

• Content analysis : As its name suggests, this is a research method used to identify frequencies and recurring words, subjects, and concepts in image, video, or audio content. It transforms qualitative information into quantitative data to help discover trends and conclusions that will later support important research or business decisions. This method is often used by marketers to understand brand sentiment from the mouths of customers themselves. Through that, they can extract valuable information to improve their products and services. It is recommended to use content analytics tools for this method as manually performing it is very time-consuming and can lead to human error or subjectivity issues. Having a clear goal in mind before diving into it is another great practice for avoiding getting lost in the fog.  
• Thematic analysis: This method focuses on analyzing qualitative data, such as interview transcripts, survey questions, and others, to identify common patterns and separate the data into different groups according to found similarities or themes. For example, imagine you want to analyze what customers think about your restaurant. For this purpose, you do a thematic analysis on 1000 reviews and find common themes such as “fresh food”, “cold food”, “small portions”, “friendly staff”, etc. With those recurring themes in hand, you can extract conclusions about what could be improved or enhanced based on your customer’s experiences. Since this technique is more exploratory, be open to changing your research questions or goals as you go. 
• Narrative analysis: A bit more specific and complicated than the two previous methods, it is used to analyze stories and discover their meaning. These stories can be extracted from testimonials, case studies, and interviews, as these formats give people more space to tell their experiences. Given that collecting this kind of data is harder and more time-consuming, sample sizes for narrative analysis are usually smaller, which makes it harder to reproduce its findings. However, it is still a valuable technique for understanding customers' preferences and mindsets.  
• Discourse analysis : This method is used to draw the meaning of any type of visual, written, or symbolic language in relation to a social, political, cultural, or historical context. It is used to understand how context can affect how language is carried out and understood. For example, if you are doing research on power dynamics, using discourse analysis to analyze a conversation between a janitor and a CEO and draw conclusions about their responses based on the context and your research questions is a great use case for this technique. That said, like all methods in this section, discourse analytics is time-consuming as the data needs to be analyzed until no new insights emerge.  
• Grounded theory analysis : The grounded theory approach aims to create or discover a new theory by carefully testing and evaluating the data available. Unlike all other qualitative approaches on this list, grounded theory helps extract conclusions and hypotheses from the data instead of going into the analysis with a defined hypothesis. This method is very popular amongst researchers, analysts, and marketers as the results are completely data-backed, providing a factual explanation of any scenario. It is often used when researching a completely new topic or with little knowledge as this space to start from the ground up. 

Quantitative Data Interpretation

If quantitative data interpretation could be summed up in one word (and it really can’t), that word would be “numerical.” There are few certainties when it comes to data analysis, but you can be sure that if the research you are engaging in has no numbers involved, it is not quantitative research, as this analysis refers to a set of processes by which numerical data is analyzed. More often than not, it involves the use of statistical modeling such as standard deviation, mean, and median. Let’s quickly review the most common statistical terms:

• Mean: A mean represents a numerical average for a set of responses. When dealing with a data set (or multiple data sets), a mean will represent the central value of a specific set of numbers. It is the sum of the values divided by the number of values within the data set. Other terms that can be used to describe the concept are arithmetic mean, average, and mathematical expectation.
• Standard deviation: This is another statistical term commonly used in quantitative analysis. Standard deviation reveals the distribution of the responses around the mean. It describes the degree of consistency within the responses; together with the mean, it provides insight into data sets.
• Frequency distribution: This is a measurement gauging the rate of a response appearance within a data set. When using a survey, for example, frequency distribution, it can determine the number of times a specific ordinal scale response appears (i.e., agree, strongly agree, disagree, etc.). Frequency distribution is extremely keen in determining the degree of consensus among data points.

Typically, quantitative data is measured by visually presenting correlation tests between two or more variables of significance. Different processes can be used together or separately, and comparisons can be made to ultimately arrive at a conclusion. Other signature interpretation processes of quantitative data include:

• Regression analysis: Essentially, it uses historical data to understand the relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables. Knowing which variables are related and how they developed in the past allows you to anticipate possible outcomes and make better decisions going forward. For example, if you want to predict your sales for next month, you can use regression to understand what factors will affect them, such as products on sale and the launch of a new campaign, among many others. 
• Cohort analysis: This method identifies groups of users who share common characteristics during a particular time period. In a business scenario, cohort analysis is commonly used to understand customer behaviors. For example, a cohort could be all users who have signed up for a free trial on a given day. An analysis would be carried out to see how these users behave, what actions they carry out, and how their behavior differs from other user groups.
• Predictive analysis: As its name suggests, the predictive method aims to predict future developments by analyzing historical and current data. Powered by technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, predictive analytics practices enable businesses to identify patterns or potential issues and plan informed strategies in advance.
• Prescriptive analysis: Also powered by predictions, the prescriptive method uses techniques such as graph analysis, complex event processing, and neural networks, among others, to try to unravel the effect that future decisions will have in order to adjust them before they are actually made. This helps businesses to develop responsive, practical business strategies.
• Conjoint analysis: Typically applied to survey analysis, the conjoint approach is used to analyze how individuals value different attributes of a product or service. This helps researchers and businesses to define pricing, product features, packaging, and many other attributes. A common use is menu-based conjoint analysis, in which individuals are given a “menu” of options from which they can build their ideal concept or product. Through this, analysts can understand which attributes they would pick above others and drive conclusions.
• Cluster analysis: Last but not least, the cluster is a method used to group objects into categories. Since there is no target variable when using cluster analysis, it is a useful method to find hidden trends and patterns in the data. In a business context, clustering is used for audience segmentation to create targeted experiences. In market research, it is often used to identify age groups, geographical information, and earnings, among others.

Now that we have seen how to interpret data, let's move on and ask ourselves some questions: What are some of the benefits of data interpretation? Why do all industries engage in data research and analysis? These are basic questions, but they often don’t receive adequate attention.

Your Chance: Want to test a powerful data analysis software? Use our 14-days free trial & start extracting insights from your data!

Why Data Interpretation Is Important

The purpose of collection and interpretation is to acquire useful and usable information and to make the most informed decisions possible. From businesses to newlyweds researching their first home, data collection and interpretation provide limitless benefits for a wide range of institutions and individuals.

Data analysis and interpretation, regardless of the method and qualitative/quantitative status, may include the following characteristics:

• Data identification and explanation
• Comparing and contrasting data
• Identification of data outliers
• Future predictions

Data analysis and interpretation, in the end, help improve processes and identify problems. It is difficult to grow and make dependable improvements without, at the very least, minimal data collection and interpretation. What is the keyword? Dependable. Vague ideas regarding performance enhancement exist within all institutions and industries. Yet, without proper research and analysis, an idea is likely to remain in a stagnant state forever (i.e., minimal growth). So… what are a few of the business benefits of digital age data analysis and interpretation? Let’s take a look!

1) Informed decision-making: A decision is only as good as the knowledge that formed it. Informed data decision-making can potentially set industry leaders apart from the rest of the market pack. Studies have shown that companies in the top third of their industries are, on average, 5% more productive and 6% more profitable when implementing informed data decision-making processes. Most decisive actions will arise only after a problem has been identified or a goal defined. Data analysis should include identification, thesis development, and data collection, followed by data communication.

If institutions only follow that simple order, one that we should all be familiar with from grade school science fairs, then they will be able to solve issues as they emerge in real-time. Informed decision-making has a tendency to be cyclical. This means there is really no end, and eventually, new questions and conditions arise within the process that need to be studied further. The monitoring of data results will inevitably return the process to the start with new data and sights.

2) Anticipating needs with trends identification: data insights provide knowledge, and knowledge is power. The insights obtained from market and consumer data analyses have the ability to set trends for peers within similar market segments. A perfect example of how data analytics can impact trend prediction is evidenced in the music identification application Shazam . The application allows users to upload an audio clip of a song they like but can’t seem to identify. Users make 15 million song identifications a day. With this data, Shazam has been instrumental in predicting future popular artists.

When industry trends are identified, they can then serve a greater industry purpose. For example, the insights from Shazam’s monitoring benefits not only Shazam in understanding how to meet consumer needs but also grant music executives and record label companies an insight into the pop-culture scene of the day. Data gathering and interpretation processes can allow for industry-wide climate prediction and result in greater revenue streams across the market. For this reason, all institutions should follow the basic data cycle of collection, interpretation, decision-making, and monitoring.

3) Cost efficiency: Proper implementation of analytics processes can provide businesses with profound cost advantages within their industries. A recent data study performed by Deloitte vividly demonstrates this in finding that data analysis ROI is driven by efficient cost reductions. Often, this benefit is overlooked because making money is typically viewed as “sexier” than saving money. Yet, sound data analyses have the ability to alert management to cost-reduction opportunities without any significant exertion of effort on the part of human capital.

A great example of the potential for cost efficiency through data analysis is Intel. Prior to 2012, Intel would conduct over 19,000 manufacturing function tests on their chips before they could be deemed acceptable for release. To cut costs and reduce test time, Intel implemented predictive data analyses. By using historical and current data, Intel now avoids testing each chip 19,000 times by focusing on specific and individual chip tests. After its implementation in 2012, Intel saved over $3 million in manufacturing costs. Cost reduction may not be as “sexy” as data profit, but as Intel proves, it is a benefit of data analysis that should not be neglected.

4) Clear foresight: companies that collect and analyze their data gain better knowledge about themselves, their processes, and their performance. They can identify performance challenges when they arise and take action to overcome them. Data interpretation through visual representations lets them process their findings faster and make better-informed decisions on the company's future.

Key Data Interpretation Skills You Should Have

Just like any other process, data interpretation and analysis require researchers or analysts to have some key skills to be able to perform successfully. It is not enough just to apply some methods and tools to the data; the person who is managing it needs to be objective and have a data-driven mind, among other skills. 

It is a common misconception to think that the required skills are mostly number-related. While data interpretation is heavily analytically driven, it also requires communication and narrative skills, as the results of the analysis need to be presented in a way that is easy to understand for all types of audiences. 

Luckily, with the rise of self-service tools and AI-driven technologies, data interpretation is no longer segregated for analysts only. However, the topic still remains a big challenge for businesses that make big investments in data and tools to support it, as the interpretation skills required are still lacking. It is worthless to put massive amounts of money into extracting information if you are not going to be able to interpret what that information is telling you. For that reason, below we list the top 5 data interpretation skills your employees or researchers should have to extract the maximum potential from the data. 

• Data Literacy: The first and most important skill to have is data literacy. This means having the ability to understand, work, and communicate with data. It involves knowing the types of data sources, methods, and ethical implications of using them. In research, this skill is often a given. However, in a business context, there might be many employees who are not comfortable with data. The issue is the interpretation of data can not be solely responsible for the data team, as it is not sustainable in the long run. Experts advise business leaders to carefully assess the literacy level across their workforce and implement training instances to ensure everyone can interpret their data. 
• Data Tools: The data interpretation and analysis process involves using various tools to collect, clean, store, and analyze the data. The complexity of the tools varies depending on the type of data and the analysis goals. Going from simple ones like Excel to more complex ones like databases, such as SQL, or programming languages, such as R or Python. It also involves visual analytics tools to bring the data to life through the use of graphs and charts. Managing these tools is a fundamental skill as they make the process faster and more efficient. As mentioned before, most modern solutions are now self-service, enabling less technical users to use them without problem.
• Critical Thinking: Another very important skill is to have critical thinking. Data hides a range of conclusions, trends, and patterns that must be discovered. It is not just about comparing numbers; it is about putting a story together based on multiple factors that will lead to a conclusion. Therefore, having the ability to look further from what is right in front of you is an invaluable skill for data interpretation. 
• Data Ethics: In the information age, being aware of the legal and ethical responsibilities that come with the use of data is of utmost importance. In short, data ethics involves respecting the privacy and confidentiality of data subjects, as well as ensuring accuracy and transparency for data usage. It requires the analyzer or researcher to be completely objective with its interpretation to avoid any biases or discrimination. Many countries have already implemented regulations regarding the use of data, including the GDPR or the ACM Code Of Ethics. Awareness of these regulations and responsibilities is a fundamental skill that anyone working in data interpretation should have. 
• Domain Knowledge: Another skill that is considered important when interpreting data is to have domain knowledge. As mentioned before, data hides valuable insights that need to be uncovered. To do so, the analyst needs to know about the industry or domain from which the information is coming and use that knowledge to explore it and put it into a broader context. This is especially valuable in a business context, where most departments are now analyzing data independently with the help of a live dashboard instead of relying on the IT department, which can often overlook some aspects due to a lack of expertise in the topic. 

Common Data Analysis And Interpretation Problems

The oft-repeated mantra of those who fear data advancements in the digital age is “big data equals big trouble.” While that statement is not accurate, it is safe to say that certain data interpretation problems or “pitfalls” exist and can occur when analyzing data, especially at the speed of thought. Let’s identify some of the most common data misinterpretation risks and shed some light on how they can be avoided:

1) Correlation mistaken for causation: our first misinterpretation of data refers to the tendency of data analysts to mix the cause of a phenomenon with correlation. It is the assumption that because two actions occurred together, one caused the other. This is inaccurate, as actions can occur together, absent a cause-and-effect relationship.

• Digital age example: assuming that increased revenue results from increased social media followers… there might be a definitive correlation between the two, especially with today’s multi-channel purchasing experiences. But that does not mean an increase in followers is the direct cause of increased revenue. There could be both a common cause and an indirect causality.
• Remedy: attempt to eliminate the variable you believe to be causing the phenomenon.

2) Confirmation bias: our second problem is data interpretation bias. It occurs when you have a theory or hypothesis in mind but are intent on only discovering data patterns that support it while rejecting those that do not.

• Digital age example: your boss asks you to analyze the success of a recent multi-platform social media marketing campaign. While analyzing the potential data variables from the campaign (one that you ran and believe performed well), you see that the share rate for Facebook posts was great, while the share rate for Twitter Tweets was not. Using only Facebook posts to prove your hypothesis that the campaign was successful would be a perfect manifestation of confirmation bias.
• Remedy: as this pitfall is often based on subjective desires, one remedy would be to analyze data with a team of objective individuals. If this is not possible, another solution is to resist the urge to make a conclusion before data exploration has been completed. Remember to always try to disprove a hypothesis, not prove it.

3) Irrelevant data: the third data misinterpretation pitfall is especially important in the digital age. As large data is no longer centrally stored and as it continues to be analyzed at the speed of thought, it is inevitable that analysts will focus on data that is irrelevant to the problem they are trying to correct.

• Digital age example: in attempting to gauge the success of an email lead generation campaign, you notice that the number of homepage views directly resulting from the campaign increased, but the number of monthly newsletter subscribers did not. Based on the number of homepage views, you decide the campaign was a success when really it generated zero leads.
• Remedy: proactively and clearly frame any data analysis variables and KPIs prior to engaging in a data review. If the metric you use to measure the success of a lead generation campaign is newsletter subscribers, there is no need to review the number of homepage visits. Be sure to focus on the data variable that answers your question or solves your problem and not on irrelevant data.

4) Truncating an Axes: When creating a graph to start interpreting the results of your analysis, it is important to keep the axes truthful and avoid generating misleading visualizations. Starting the axes in a value that doesn’t portray the actual truth about the data can lead to false conclusions. 

• Digital age example: In the image below, we can see a graph from Fox News in which the Y-axes start at 34%, making it seem that the difference between 35% and 39.6% is way higher than it actually is. This could lead to a misinterpretation of the tax rate changes. 

* Source : www.venngage.com *

• Remedy: Be careful with how your data is visualized. Be respectful and realistic with axes to avoid misinterpretation of your data. See below how the Fox News chart looks when using the correct axis values. This chart was created with datapine's modern online data visualization tool.

5) (Small) sample size: Another common problem is using a small sample size. Logically, the bigger the sample size, the more accurate and reliable the results. However, this also depends on the size of the effect of the study. For example, the sample size in a survey about the quality of education will not be the same as for one about people doing outdoor sports in a specific area. 

• Digital age example: Imagine you ask 30 people a question, and 29 answer “yes,” resulting in 95% of the total. Now imagine you ask the same question to 1000, and 950 of them answer “yes,” which is again 95%. While these percentages might look the same, they certainly do not mean the same thing, as a 30-person sample size is not a significant number to establish a truthful conclusion. 
• Remedy: Researchers say that in order to determine the correct sample size to get truthful and meaningful results, it is necessary to define a margin of error that will represent the maximum amount they want the results to deviate from the statistical mean. Paired with this, they need to define a confidence level that should be between 90 and 99%. With these two values in hand, researchers can calculate an accurate sample size for their studies.

6) Reliability, subjectivity, and generalizability : When performing qualitative analysis, researchers must consider practical and theoretical limitations when interpreting the data. In some cases, this type of research can be considered unreliable because of uncontrolled factors that might or might not affect the results. This is paired with the fact that the researcher has a primary role in the interpretation process, meaning he or she decides what is relevant and what is not, and as we know, interpretations can be very subjective.

Generalizability is also an issue that researchers face when dealing with qualitative analysis. As mentioned in the point about having a small sample size, it is difficult to draw conclusions that are 100% representative because the results might be biased or unrepresentative of a wider population. 

While these factors are mostly present in qualitative research, they can also affect the quantitative analysis. For example, when choosing which KPIs to portray and how to portray them, analysts can also be biased and represent them in a way that benefits their analysis.

• Digital age example: Biased questions in a survey are a great example of reliability and subjectivity issues. Imagine you are sending a survey to your clients to see how satisfied they are with your customer service with this question: “How amazing was your experience with our customer service team?”. Here, we can see that this question clearly influences the response of the individual by putting the word “amazing” on it. 
• Remedy: A solution to avoid these issues is to keep your research honest and neutral. Keep the wording of the questions as objective as possible. For example: “On a scale of 1-10, how satisfied were you with our customer service team?”. This does not lead the respondent to any specific answer, meaning the results of your survey will be reliable. 

Data Interpretation Best Practices & Tips

Data analysis and interpretation are critical to developing sound conclusions and making better-informed decisions. As we have seen with this article, there is an art and science to the interpretation of data. To help you with this purpose, we will list a few relevant techniques, methods, and tricks you can implement for a successful data management process. 

As mentioned at the beginning of this post, the first step to interpreting data in a successful way is to identify the type of analysis you will perform and apply the methods respectively. Clearly differentiate between qualitative (observe, document, and interview notice, collect and think about things) and quantitative analysis (you lead research with a lot of numerical data to be analyzed through various statistical methods). 

1) Ask the right data interpretation questions

The first data interpretation technique is to define a clear baseline for your work. This can be done by answering some critical questions that will serve as a useful guideline to start. Some of them include: what are the goals and objectives of my analysis? What type of data interpretation method will I use? Who will use this data in the future? And most importantly, what general question am I trying to answer?

Once all this information has been defined, you will be ready for the next step: collecting your data. 

2) Collect and assimilate your data

Now that a clear baseline has been established, it is time to collect the information you will use. Always remember that your methods for data collection will vary depending on what type of analysis method you use, which can be qualitative or quantitative. Based on that, relying on professional online data analysis tools to facilitate the process is a great practice in this regard, as manually collecting and assessing raw data is not only very time-consuming and expensive but is also at risk of errors and subjectivity. 

Once your data is collected, you need to carefully assess it to understand if the quality is appropriate to be used during a study. This means, is the sample size big enough? Were the procedures used to collect the data implemented correctly? Is the date range from the data correct? If coming from an external source, is it a trusted and objective one? 

With all the needed information in hand, you are ready to start the interpretation process, but first, you need to visualize your data. 

3) Use the right data visualization type 

Data visualizations such as business graphs , charts, and tables are fundamental to successfully interpreting data. This is because data visualization via interactive charts and graphs makes the information more understandable and accessible. As you might be aware, there are different types of visualizations you can use, but not all of them are suitable for any analysis purpose. Using the wrong graph can lead to misinterpretation of your data, so it’s very important to carefully pick the right visual for it. Let’s look at some use cases of common data visualizations. 

• Bar chart: One of the most used chart types, the bar chart uses rectangular bars to show the relationship between 2 or more variables. There are different types of bar charts for different interpretations, including the horizontal bar chart, column bar chart, and stacked bar chart. 
• Line chart: Most commonly used to show trends, acceleration or decelerations, and volatility, the line chart aims to show how data changes over a period of time, for example, sales over a year. A few tips to keep this chart ready for interpretation are not using many variables that can overcrowd the graph and keeping your axis scale close to the highest data point to avoid making the information hard to read. 
• Pie chart: Although it doesn’t do a lot in terms of analysis due to its uncomplex nature, pie charts are widely used to show the proportional composition of a variable. Visually speaking, showing a percentage in a bar chart is way more complicated than showing it in a pie chart. However, this also depends on the number of variables you are comparing. If your pie chart needs to be divided into 10 portions, then it is better to use a bar chart instead. 
• Tables: While they are not a specific type of chart, tables are widely used when interpreting data. Tables are especially useful when you want to portray data in its raw format. They give you the freedom to easily look up or compare individual values while also displaying grand totals. 

With the use of data visualizations becoming more and more critical for businesses’ analytical success, many tools have emerged to help users visualize their data in a cohesive and interactive way. One of the most popular ones is the use of BI dashboards . These visual tools provide a centralized view of various graphs and charts that paint a bigger picture of a topic. We will discuss the power of dashboards for an efficient data interpretation practice in the next portion of this post. If you want to learn more about different types of graphs and charts , take a look at our complete guide on the topic. 

4) Start interpreting 

After the tedious preparation part, you can start extracting conclusions from your data. As mentioned many times throughout the post, the way you decide to interpret the data will solely depend on the methods you initially decided to use. If you had initial research questions or hypotheses, then you should look for ways to prove their validity. If you are going into the data with no defined hypothesis, then start looking for relationships and patterns that will allow you to extract valuable conclusions from the information. 

During the process of interpretation, stay curious and creative, dig into the data, and determine if there are any other critical questions that should be asked. If any new questions arise, you need to assess if you have the necessary information to answer them. Being able to identify if you need to dedicate more time and resources to the research is a very important step. No matter if you are studying customer behaviors or a new cancer treatment, the findings from your analysis may dictate important decisions in the future. Therefore, taking the time to really assess the information is key. For that purpose, data interpretation software proves to be very useful.

5) Keep your interpretation objective

As mentioned above, objectivity is one of the most important data interpretation skills but also one of the hardest. Being the person closest to the investigation, it is easy to become subjective when looking for answers in the data. A good way to stay objective is to show the information related to the study to other people, for example, research partners or even the people who will use your findings once they are done. This can help avoid confirmation bias and any reliability issues with your interpretation. 

Remember, using a visualization tool such as a modern dashboard will make the interpretation process way easier and more efficient as the data can be navigated and manipulated in an easy and organized way. And not just that, using a dashboard tool to present your findings to a specific audience will make the information easier to understand and the presentation way more engaging thanks to the visual nature of these tools. 

6) Mark your findings and draw conclusions

Findings are the observations you extracted from your data. They are the facts that will help you drive deeper conclusions about your research. For example, findings can be trends and patterns you found during your interpretation process. To put your findings into perspective, you can compare them with other resources that use similar methods and use them as benchmarks.

Reflect on your own thinking and reasoning and be aware of the many pitfalls data analysis and interpretation carry—correlation versus causation, subjective bias, false information, inaccurate data, etc. Once you are comfortable with interpreting the data, you will be ready to develop conclusions, see if your initial questions were answered, and suggest recommendations based on them.

Interpretation of Data: The Use of Dashboards Bridging The Gap

As we have seen, quantitative and qualitative methods are distinct types of data interpretation and analysis. Both offer a varying degree of return on investment (ROI) regarding data investigation, testing, and decision-making. But how do you mix the two and prevent a data disconnect? The answer is professional data dashboards. 

For a few years now, dashboards have become invaluable tools to visualize and interpret data. These tools offer a centralized and interactive view of data and provide the perfect environment for exploration and extracting valuable conclusions. They bridge the quantitative and qualitative information gap by unifying all the data in one place with the help of stunning visuals. 

Not only that, but these powerful tools offer a large list of benefits, and we will discuss some of them below. 

1) Connecting and blending data. With today’s pace of innovation, it is no longer feasible (nor desirable) to have bulk data centrally located. As businesses continue to globalize and borders continue to dissolve, it will become increasingly important for businesses to possess the capability to run diverse data analyses absent the limitations of location. Data dashboards decentralize data without compromising on the necessary speed of thought while blending both quantitative and qualitative data. Whether you want to measure customer trends or organizational performance, you now have the capability to do both without the need for a singular selection.

2) Mobile Data. Related to the notion of “connected and blended data” is that of mobile data. In today’s digital world, employees are spending less time at their desks and simultaneously increasing production. This is made possible because mobile solutions for analytical tools are no longer standalone. Today, mobile analysis applications seamlessly integrate with everyday business tools. In turn, both quantitative and qualitative data are now available on-demand where they’re needed, when they’re needed, and how they’re needed via interactive online dashboards .

3) Visualization. Data dashboards merge the data gap between qualitative and quantitative data interpretation methods through the science of visualization. Dashboard solutions come “out of the box” and are well-equipped to create easy-to-understand data demonstrations. Modern online data visualization tools provide a variety of color and filter patterns, encourage user interaction, and are engineered to help enhance future trend predictability. All of these visual characteristics make for an easy transition among data methods – you only need to find the right types of data visualization to tell your data story the best way possible.

4) Collaboration. Whether in a business environment or a research project, collaboration is key in data interpretation and analysis. Dashboards are online tools that can be easily shared through a password-protected URL or automated email. Through them, users can collaborate and communicate through the data in an efficient way. Eliminating the need for infinite files with lost updates. Tools such as datapine offer real-time updates, meaning your dashboards will update on their own as soon as new information is available.  

Examples Of Data Interpretation In Business

To give you an idea of how a dashboard can fulfill the need to bridge quantitative and qualitative analysis and help in understanding how to interpret data in research thanks to visualization, below, we will discuss three valuable examples to put their value into perspective.

1. Customer Satisfaction Dashboard 

This market research dashboard brings together both qualitative and quantitative data that are knowledgeably analyzed and visualized in a meaningful way that everyone can understand, thus empowering any viewer to interpret it. Let’s explore it below. 

**click to enlarge**

The value of this template lies in its highly visual nature. As mentioned earlier, visuals make the interpretation process way easier and more efficient. Having critical pieces of data represented with colorful and interactive icons and graphs makes it possible to uncover insights at a glance. For example, the colors green, yellow, and red on the charts for the NPS and the customer effort score allow us to conclude that most respondents are satisfied with this brand with a short glance. A further dive into the line chart below can help us dive deeper into this conclusion, as we can see both metrics developed positively in the past 6 months. 

The bottom part of the template provides visually stunning representations of different satisfaction scores for quality, pricing, design, and service. By looking at these, we can conclude that, overall, customers are satisfied with this company in most areas. 

2. Brand Analysis Dashboard

Next, in our list of data interpretation examples, we have a template that shows the answers to a survey on awareness for Brand D. The sample size is listed on top to get a perspective of the data, which is represented using interactive charts and graphs. 

When interpreting information, context is key to understanding it correctly. For that reason, the dashboard starts by offering insights into the demographics of the surveyed audience. In general, we can see ages and gender are diverse. Therefore, we can conclude these brands are not targeting customers from a specified demographic, an important aspect to put the surveyed answers into perspective. 

Looking at the awareness portion, we can see that brand B is the most popular one, with brand D coming second on both questions. This means brand D is not doing wrong, but there is still room for improvement compared to brand B. To see where brand D could improve, the researcher could go into the bottom part of the dashboard and consult the answers for branding themes and celebrity analysis. These are important as they give clear insight into what people and messages the audience associates with brand D. This is an opportunity to exploit these topics in different ways and achieve growth and success. 

3. Product Innovation Dashboard 

Our third and last dashboard example shows the answers to a survey on product innovation for a technology company. Just like the previous templates, the interactive and visual nature of the dashboard makes it the perfect tool to interpret data efficiently and effectively. 

Starting from right to left, we first get a list of the top 5 products by purchase intention. This information lets us understand if the product being evaluated resembles what the audience already intends to purchase. It is a great starting point to see how customers would respond to the new product. This information can be complemented with other key metrics displayed in the dashboard. For example, the usage and purchase intention track how the market would receive the product and if they would purchase it, respectively. Interpreting these values as positive or negative will depend on the company and its expectations regarding the survey. 

Complementing these metrics, we have the willingness to pay. Arguably, one of the most important metrics to define pricing strategies. Here, we can see that most respondents think the suggested price is a good value for money. Therefore, we can interpret that the product would sell for that price. 

To see more data analysis and interpretation examples for different industries and functions, visit our library of business dashboards .

To Conclude…

As we reach the end of this insightful post about data interpretation and analysis, we hope you have a clear understanding of the topic. We've covered the definition and given some examples and methods to perform a successful interpretation process.

The importance of data interpretation is undeniable. Dashboards not only bridge the information gap between traditional data interpretation methods and technology, but they can help remedy and prevent the major pitfalls of the process. As a digital age solution, they combine the best of the past and the present to allow for informed decision-making with maximum data interpretation ROI.

To start visualizing your insights in a meaningful and actionable way, test our online reporting software for free with our 14-day trial !

• Dissertation Coaching
• Qualitative Data Analysis
• Statistical Consulting
• Dissertation Editing
• On-Demand Courses
• AI-Powered Academic Coaching Tools

5 Steps to Interpreting Statistical Results for Your Dissertation: From Numbers to Insight

Interpreting results from statistical analysis can be daunting, especially if you are unfamiliar with the field of statistics. However, understanding statistical results is crucial when you’re conducting quantitative research for your dissertation. In this blog post, we will outline a step-by-step guide to help you get started with interpreting the results of statistical analysis for your dissertation.

🔍 Step 1: Review your Research Questions and Hypotheses

Before you start interpreting your statistical results, it is important to revisit your research questions and hypotheses. It is easy to be tempted to include as much information as possible, Doing so will ensure that you are interpreting your results in a way that answers your research questions. When initially confronted with the results of your statistical analyses, you may find it difficult to determine where to start. It is common to feel the temptation to include as much data as possible in your results chapter, fearing that excluding any information might compromise the integrity of the study. However, succumbing to this temptation can lead to a loss of direction and clarity in the presentation of results. Reviewing your research questions and hypotheses will help you to focus on the key findings that are relevant to your research objectives.

📊 Step 2: Examine the Descriptive Statistics

After reviewing your research questions and hypotheses (Step 1), the next crucial step in interpreting your statistical results is to examine your descriptive statistics. Descriptive statistics play a fundamental role in summarizing the basic characteristics of your data, providing valuable insights into its distribution, sample characteristics, frequencies, and potential outliers.

One aspect to consider when examining descriptive statistics is sample characteristics. These characteristics provide an overview of the participants or subjects included in your study. For example, in a survey-based study, you may examine demographic variables such as age, gender, educational background, or socioeconomic status. By analyzing these sample characteristics, you can understand the composition of your sample and evaluate its representativeness or any potential biases.

Additionally, descriptive statistics help you analyze the frequencies of categorical variables. Frequencies provide information about the distribution of responses or categories within a particular variable. This is particularly useful when examining survey questions with multiple response options or categorical variables such as occupation or political affiliation. By examining frequencies, you can identify dominant categories or patterns within your data, which may contribute to your overall understanding of the research topic.

Descriptive statistics allow you to explore additional measures beyond central tendency and dispersion. For example, measures such as skewness and kurtosis provide insights into the shape of your data distribution. Skewness indicates whether your data is skewed towards the left or right, while kurtosis measures the peakedness or flatness of the distribution. These measures help you assess the departure of your data from a normal distribution and determine if any transformation or adjustment is required for further analysis.

Analyzing descriptive statistics also involves considering any potential outliers in your data. Outliers are extreme values that significantly deviate from the majority of your data points. These data points can have a substantial impact on the overall analysis and conclusions. By identifying outliers, you can investigate their potential causes, assess their impact on your results, and make informed decisions about their inclusion or exclusion from further analysis.

Examining your descriptive statistics, including sample characteristics, frequencies, measures of distribution shape, and identification of outliers, provides a comprehensive understanding of your data. These insights not only facilitate a thorough description of your dataset but also serve as a foundation for subsequent analysis and interpretation.

✅ Step 3: Understand the Inferential Statistics and Statistical Significance

After reviewing your research questions and hypotheses (Step 1) and examining descriptive statistics (Step 2), you need to understand the inferential statistics and determine their statistical significance.

Inferential statistics are used to draw conclusions and make inferences about a larger population based on the data collected from a sample. These statistical tests help researchers determine if the observed patterns, relationships, or differences in the data are statistically significant or if they occurred by chance. Inferential statistics involve hypothesis testing, which involves formulating a null hypothesis (H0) and an alternative hypothesis (Ha). The null hypothesis represents the absence of an effect or relationship, while the alternative hypothesis suggests the presence of a specific effect or relationship. By conducting hypothesis tests, you can assess the evidence in favor of or against the alternative hypothesis ( if you need a refresher on hypothesis testing – read more about it here ).

Statistical significance refers to the likelihood that the observed results are not due to random chance. It helps you determine if the findings in your study are meaningful and can be generalized to the larger population. Typically, a significance level (alpha) is predetermined (e.g., 0.05), and if the p-value (probability value) associated with the test statistic is less than the significance level, the results are deemed statistically significant.

By comprehending inferential statistics and assessing statistical significance, you can draw meaningful conclusions from your data and make generalizations about the larger population. However, it is crucial to interpret the results in conjunction with practical significance, considering the effect size, context, and relevance to your research questions and hypotheses.

💡 Step 4: Consider Effect Sizes

It is important to note that statistical significance does not imply practical or substantive significance. Effect size or practical significance refers to the meaningfulness or importance of the observed effect or relationship in real-world terms. While a statistically significant result indicates that the observed effect is unlikely due to chance, it is essential to consider the magnitude of the effect and its practical implications when interpreting the results. They help you assess the importance and meaningfulness of the findings beyond mere statistical significance.

There are various effect size measures depending on the type of analysis and research design employed in your study. For example, in experimental or intervention studies, you might consider measures such as Cohen’s d or standardized mean difference to quantify the difference in means between groups. Cohen’s d represents the effect size in terms of standard deviations, providing an estimate of the distance between the group means.

In correlation or regression analyses, you may examine effect size measures such as Pearson’s r or R-squared. Pearson’s r quantifies the strength and direction of the linear relationship between two variables, while R-squared indicates the proportion of variance in the dependent variable explained by the independent variables.

Effect sizes are important because they help you evaluate the practical significance of your findings. A small effect size may indicate that the observed effect, although statistically significant, has limited practical relevance. Conversely, a large effect size suggests a substantial and meaningful impact in the context of your research.

Additionally, considering effect sizes allows for meaningful comparisons across studies. By examining effect sizes, researchers can assess the consistency of findings in the literature and determine the generalizability and importance of their own results within the broader scientific context.

It is worth noting that effect sizes are influenced by various factors, including sample size, measurement scales, and research design. Therefore, it is crucial to interpret effect sizes within the specific context of your study and research questions.

🗣️ Step 5: Interpret your Results in the Context of your Research Questions

After reviewing your research questions and hypotheses (Step 1), examining descriptive statistics (Step 2), understanding inferential statistics and statistical significance (Step 3), and considering effect sizes (Step 4), the final step in interpreting your statistical results is to interpret them in the context of your research questions.

Interpreting your results involves drawing meaningful conclusions and providing explanations that align with your research objectives. Here are some key considerations for interpreting your results effectively:

• Relate the findings to your research questions: Begin by revisiting your research questions and hypotheses. Determine how your results contribute to answering these questions and whether they support or refute your initial expectations. Consider the implications of the findings in light of your research objectives.
• Analyze patterns and relationships: Look for patterns, trends, or relationships within your data. Are there consistent findings across different variables or subgroups? Are there unexpected findings that require further exploration or explanation? Identify any notable variations or discrepancies that might inform your understanding of the research topic.
• Provide context and theoretical explanations: Situate your results within existing theories, concepts, or prior research. Compare your findings with previous studies and discuss similarities, differences, or contradictions. Explain how your results contribute to advancing knowledge in the field and address gaps or limitations identified in previous research.
• Consider alternative explanations: Acknowledge and discuss alternative explanations for your results. Evaluate potential confounding factors or alternative interpretations that could account for the observed patterns or relationships. By addressing these alternative explanations, you strengthen the validity and reliability of your findings.
• Discuss limitations and future directions: Reflect on the limitations of your study and the potential impact on the interpretation of your results. Address any potential sources of bias, methodological constraints, or limitations in the generalizability of your findings. Suggest future research directions that could build upon or address these limitations to further enhance knowledge in the field.

Remember that interpreting your results is not a standalone process. It requires a holistic understanding of your research questions, data analysis techniques, and the broader context of your research field. Your interpretation should be logical, supported by evidence, and provide meaningful insights that contribute to the overall understanding of the research topic.

Tips for Interpreting Statistical Results

Here are some additional tips to help you interpret your statistical results effectively:

• 👀 Visualize your data: Graphs and charts can be a powerful tool for interpreting statistical results. They can help you to identify patterns and trends in your data that may not be immediately apparent from the numbers alone.
• 📋 Consult with a statistician : If you are struggling to interpret your statistical results, it can be helpful to consult with a statistician. They can provide guidance on statistical analysis and help you to interpret your results in a way that is appropriate for your research questions.
• ✍️ Be clear and concise: When interpreting your results, it is important to be clear and concise. Avoid using technical jargon or making assumptions about your readers’ knowledge of statistics.
• 🧐 Be objective: Approach your statistical results with an objective mindset. Avoid letting your personal biases or preconceptions affect the way you interpret your results.

Interpreting the results of statistical analysis is a crucial step in any quantitative research dissertation. By following the steps outlined in this guide, you can ensure that you are interpreting your results in a way that answers your research questions. Remember to be cautious, objective, and clear when interpreting your results, and don’t hesitate to seek guidance from a statistician if you are struggling. With a little bit of practice and patience, you can unlock the insights hidden within your data and make meaningful contributions to your field of study.

Author:  Kirstie Eastwood

Related posts.

Download our free guide on how to overcome the top 10 challenges common to doctoral candidates and graduate sooner.

Thank You 🙌

Quantitative Data Analysis 101

The lingo, methods and techniques, explained simply.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA)  and Kerryn Warren (PhD) | December 2020

Quantitative data analysis is one of those things that often strikes fear in students. It’s totally understandable – quantitative analysis is a complex topic, full of daunting lingo , like medians, modes, correlation and regression. Suddenly we’re all wishing we’d paid a little more attention in math class…

The good news is that while quantitative data analysis is a mammoth topic, gaining a working understanding of the basics isn’t that hard , even for those of us who avoid numbers and math . In this post, we’ll break quantitative analysis down into simple , bite-sized chunks so you can approach your research with confidence.

Overview: Quantitative Data Analysis 101

• What (exactly) is quantitative data analysis?
• When to use quantitative analysis
• How quantitative analysis works

The two “branches” of quantitative analysis

• Descriptive statistics 101
• Inferential statistics 101
• How to choose the right quantitative methods
• Recap & summary

What is quantitative data analysis?

Despite being a mouthful, quantitative data analysis simply means analysing data that is numbers-based – or data that can be easily “converted” into numbers without losing any meaning.

For example, category-based variables like gender, ethnicity, or native language could all be “converted” into numbers without losing meaning – for example, English could equal 1, French 2, etc.

This contrasts against qualitative data analysis, where the focus is on words, phrases and expressions that can’t be reduced to numbers. If you’re interested in learning about qualitative analysis, check out our post and video here .

What is quantitative analysis used for?

Quantitative analysis is generally used for three purposes.

• Firstly, it’s used to measure differences between groups . For example, the popularity of different clothing colours or brands.
• Secondly, it’s used to assess relationships between variables . For example, the relationship between weather temperature and voter turnout.
• And third, it’s used to test hypotheses in a scientifically rigorous way. For example, a hypothesis about the impact of a certain vaccine.

Again, this contrasts with qualitative analysis , which can be used to analyse people’s perceptions and feelings about an event or situation. In other words, things that can’t be reduced to numbers.

How does quantitative analysis work?

Well, since quantitative data analysis is all about analysing numbers , it’s no surprise that it involves statistics . Statistical analysis methods form the engine that powers quantitative analysis, and these methods can vary from pretty basic calculations (for example, averages and medians) to more sophisticated analyses (for example, correlations and regressions).

Sounds like gibberish? Don’t worry. We’ll explain all of that in this post. Importantly, you don’t need to be a statistician or math wiz to pull off a good quantitative analysis. We’ll break down all the technical mumbo jumbo in this post.

Need a helping hand?

As I mentioned, quantitative analysis is powered by statistical analysis methods . There are two main “branches” of statistical methods that are used – descriptive statistics and inferential statistics . In your research, you might only use descriptive statistics, or you might use a mix of both , depending on what you’re trying to figure out. In other words, depending on your research questions, aims and objectives . I’ll explain how to choose your methods later.

So, what are descriptive and inferential statistics?

Well, before I can explain that, we need to take a quick detour to explain some lingo. To understand the difference between these two branches of statistics, you need to understand two important words. These words are population and sample .

First up, population . In statistics, the population is the entire group of people (or animals or organisations or whatever) that you’re interested in researching. For example, if you were interested in researching Tesla owners in the US, then the population would be all Tesla owners in the US.

However, it’s extremely unlikely that you’re going to be able to interview or survey every single Tesla owner in the US. Realistically, you’ll likely only get access to a few hundred, or maybe a few thousand owners using an online survey. This smaller group of accessible people whose data you actually collect is called your sample .

So, to recap – the population is the entire group of people you’re interested in, and the sample is the subset of the population that you can actually get access to. In other words, the population is the full chocolate cake , whereas the sample is a slice of that cake.

So, why is this sample-population thing important?

Well, descriptive statistics focus on describing the sample , while inferential statistics aim to make predictions about the population, based on the findings within the sample. In other words, we use one group of statistical methods – descriptive statistics – to investigate the slice of cake, and another group of methods – inferential statistics – to draw conclusions about the entire cake. There I go with the cake analogy again…

With that out the way, let’s take a closer look at each of these branches in more detail.

Branch 1: Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics serve a simple but critically important role in your research – to describe your data set – hence the name. In other words, they help you understand the details of your sample . Unlike inferential statistics (which we’ll get to soon), descriptive statistics don’t aim to make inferences or predictions about the entire population – they’re purely interested in the details of your specific sample .

When you’re writing up your analysis, descriptive statistics are the first set of stats you’ll cover, before moving on to inferential statistics. But, that said, depending on your research objectives and research questions , they may be the only type of statistics you use. We’ll explore that a little later.

So, what kind of statistics are usually covered in this section?

Some common statistical tests used in this branch include the following:

• Mean – this is simply the mathematical average of a range of numbers.
• Median – this is the midpoint in a range of numbers when the numbers are arranged in numerical order. If the data set makes up an odd number, then the median is the number right in the middle of the set. If the data set makes up an even number, then the median is the midpoint between the two middle numbers.
• Mode – this is simply the most commonly occurring number in the data set.
• In cases where most of the numbers are quite close to the average, the standard deviation will be relatively low.
• Conversely, in cases where the numbers are scattered all over the place, the standard deviation will be relatively high.
• Skewness . As the name suggests, skewness indicates how symmetrical a range of numbers is. In other words, do they tend to cluster into a smooth bell curve shape in the middle of the graph, or do they skew to the left or right?

Feeling a bit confused? Let’s look at a practical example using a small data set.

On the left-hand side is the data set. This details the bodyweight of a sample of 10 people. On the right-hand side, we have the descriptive statistics. Let’s take a look at each of them.

First, we can see that the mean weight is 72.4 kilograms. In other words, the average weight across the sample is 72.4 kilograms. Straightforward.

Next, we can see that the median is very similar to the mean (the average). This suggests that this data set has a reasonably symmetrical distribution (in other words, a relatively smooth, centred distribution of weights, clustered towards the centre).

In terms of the mode , there is no mode in this data set. This is because each number is present only once and so there cannot be a “most common number”. If there were two people who were both 65 kilograms, for example, then the mode would be 65.

Next up is the standard deviation . 10.6 indicates that there’s quite a wide spread of numbers. We can see this quite easily by looking at the numbers themselves, which range from 55 to 90, which is quite a stretch from the mean of 72.4.

And lastly, the skewness of -0.2 tells us that the data is very slightly negatively skewed. This makes sense since the mean and the median are slightly different.

As you can see, these descriptive statistics give us some useful insight into the data set. Of course, this is a very small data set (only 10 records), so we can’t read into these statistics too much. Also, keep in mind that this is not a list of all possible descriptive statistics – just the most common ones.

But why do all of these numbers matter?

While these descriptive statistics are all fairly basic, they’re important for a few reasons:

• Firstly, they help you get both a macro and micro-level view of your data. In other words, they help you understand both the big picture and the finer details.
• Secondly, they help you spot potential errors in the data – for example, if an average is way higher than you’d expect, or responses to a question are highly varied, this can act as a warning sign that you need to double-check the data.
• And lastly, these descriptive statistics help inform which inferential statistical techniques you can use, as those techniques depend on the skewness (in other words, the symmetry and normality) of the data.

Simply put, descriptive statistics are really important , even though the statistical techniques used are fairly basic. All too often at Grad Coach, we see students skimming over the descriptives in their eagerness to get to the more exciting inferential methods, and then landing up with some very flawed results.

Don’t be a sucker – give your descriptive statistics the love and attention they deserve!

Branch 2: Inferential Statistics

As I mentioned, while descriptive statistics are all about the details of your specific data set – your sample – inferential statistics aim to make inferences about the population . In other words, you’ll use inferential statistics to make predictions about what you’d expect to find in the full population.

What kind of predictions, you ask? Well, there are two common types of predictions that researchers try to make using inferential stats:

• Firstly, predictions about differences between groups – for example, height differences between children grouped by their favourite meal or gender.
• And secondly, relationships between variables – for example, the relationship between body weight and the number of hours a week a person does yoga.

In other words, inferential statistics (when done correctly), allow you to connect the dots and make predictions about what you expect to see in the real world population, based on what you observe in your sample data. For this reason, inferential statistics are used for hypothesis testing – in other words, to test hypotheses that predict changes or differences.

Of course, when you’re working with inferential statistics, the composition of your sample is really important. In other words, if your sample doesn’t accurately represent the population you’re researching, then your findings won’t necessarily be very useful.

For example, if your population of interest is a mix of 50% male and 50% female , but your sample is 80% male , you can’t make inferences about the population based on your sample, since it’s not representative. This area of statistics is called sampling, but we won’t go down that rabbit hole here (it’s a deep one!) – we’ll save that for another post .

What statistics are usually used in this branch?

There are many, many different statistical analysis methods within the inferential branch and it’d be impossible for us to discuss them all here. So we’ll just take a look at some of the most common inferential statistical methods so that you have a solid starting point.

First up are T-Tests . T-tests compare the means (the averages) of two groups of data to assess whether they’re statistically significantly different. In other words, do they have significantly different means, standard deviations and skewness.

This type of testing is very useful for understanding just how similar or different two groups of data are. For example, you might want to compare the mean blood pressure between two groups of people – one that has taken a new medication and one that hasn’t – to assess whether they are significantly different.

Kicking things up a level, we have ANOVA, which stands for “analysis of variance”. This test is similar to a T-test in that it compares the means of various groups, but ANOVA allows you to analyse multiple groups , not just two groups So it’s basically a t-test on steroids…

Next, we have correlation analysis . This type of analysis assesses the relationship between two variables. In other words, if one variable increases, does the other variable also increase, decrease or stay the same. For example, if the average temperature goes up, do average ice creams sales increase too? We’d expect some sort of relationship between these two variables intuitively , but correlation analysis allows us to measure that relationship scientifically .

Lastly, we have regression analysis – this is quite similar to correlation in that it assesses the relationship between variables, but it goes a step further to understand cause and effect between variables, not just whether they move together. In other words, does the one variable actually cause the other one to move, or do they just happen to move together naturally thanks to another force? Just because two variables correlate doesn’t necessarily mean that one causes the other.

Stats overload…

I hear you. To make this all a little more tangible, let’s take a look at an example of a correlation in action.

Here’s a scatter plot demonstrating the correlation (relationship) between weight and height. Intuitively, we’d expect there to be some relationship between these two variables, which is what we see in this scatter plot. In other words, the results tend to cluster together in a diagonal line from bottom left to top right.

As I mentioned, these are are just a handful of inferential techniques – there are many, many more. Importantly, each statistical method has its own assumptions and limitations.

For example, some methods only work with normally distributed (parametric) data, while other methods are designed specifically for non-parametric data. And that’s exactly why descriptive statistics are so important – they’re the first step to knowing which inferential techniques you can and can’t use.

How to choose the right analysis method

To choose the right statistical methods, you need to think about two important factors :

• The type of quantitative data you have (specifically, level of measurement and the shape of the data). And,
• Your research questions and hypotheses

Let’s take a closer look at each of these.

Factor 1 – Data type

The first thing you need to consider is the type of data you’ve collected (or the type of data you will collect). By data types, I’m referring to the four levels of measurement – namely, nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio. If you’re not familiar with this lingo, check out the video below.

Why does this matter?

Well, because different statistical methods and techniques require different types of data. This is one of the “assumptions” I mentioned earlier – every method has its assumptions regarding the type of data.

For example, some techniques work with categorical data (for example, yes/no type questions, or gender or ethnicity), while others work with continuous numerical data (for example, age, weight or income) – and, of course, some work with multiple data types.

If you try to use a statistical method that doesn’t support the data type you have, your results will be largely meaningless . So, make sure that you have a clear understanding of what types of data you’ve collected (or will collect). Once you have this, you can then check which statistical methods would support your data types here .

If you haven’t collected your data yet, you can work in reverse and look at which statistical method would give you the most useful insights, and then design your data collection strategy to collect the correct data types.

Another important factor to consider is the shape of your data . Specifically, does it have a normal distribution (in other words, is it a bell-shaped curve, centred in the middle) or is it very skewed to the left or the right? Again, different statistical techniques work for different shapes of data – some are designed for symmetrical data while others are designed for skewed data.

This is another reminder of why descriptive statistics are so important – they tell you all about the shape of your data.

Factor 2: Your research questions

The next thing you need to consider is your specific research questions, as well as your hypotheses (if you have some). The nature of your research questions and research hypotheses will heavily influence which statistical methods and techniques you should use.

If you’re just interested in understanding the attributes of your sample (as opposed to the entire population), then descriptive statistics are probably all you need. For example, if you just want to assess the means (averages) and medians (centre points) of variables in a group of people.

On the other hand, if you aim to understand differences between groups or relationships between variables and to infer or predict outcomes in the population, then you’ll likely need both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics.

So, it’s really important to get very clear about your research aims and research questions, as well your hypotheses – before you start looking at which statistical techniques to use.

Never shoehorn a specific statistical technique into your research just because you like it or have some experience with it. Your choice of methods must align with all the factors we’ve covered here.

Time to recap…

You’re still with me? That’s impressive. We’ve covered a lot of ground here, so let’s recap on the key points:

• Quantitative data analysis is all about  analysing number-based data  (which includes categorical and numerical data) using various statistical techniques.
• The two main  branches  of statistics are  descriptive statistics  and  inferential statistics . Descriptives describe your sample, whereas inferentials make predictions about what you’ll find in the population.
• Common  descriptive statistical methods include  mean  (average),  median , standard  deviation  and  skewness .
• Common  inferential statistical methods include  t-tests ,  ANOVA ,  correlation  and  regression  analysis.
• To choose the right statistical methods and techniques, you need to consider the  type of data you’re working with , as well as your  research questions  and hypotheses.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

74 Comments

Hi, I have read your article. Such a brilliant post you have created.

Thank you for the feedback. Good luck with your quantitative analysis.

Thank you so much.

Thank you so much. I learnt much well. I love your summaries of the concepts. I had love you to explain how to input data using SPSS

Amazing and simple way of breaking down quantitative methods.

This is beautiful….especially for non-statisticians. I have skimmed through but I wish to read again. and please include me in other articles of the same nature when you do post. I am interested. I am sure, I could easily learn from you and get off the fear that I have had in the past. Thank you sincerely.

Send me every new information you might have.

i need every new information

Thank you for the blog. It is quite informative. Dr Peter Nemaenzhe PhD

It is wonderful. l’ve understood some of the concepts in a more compréhensive manner

Your article is so good! However, I am still a bit lost. I am doing a secondary research on Gun control in the US and increase in crime rates and I am not sure which analysis method I should use?

Based on the given learning points, this is inferential analysis, thus, use ‘t-tests, ANOVA, correlation and regression analysis’

Well explained notes. Am an MPH student and currently working on my thesis proposal, this has really helped me understand some of the things I didn’t know.

I like your page..helpful

wonderful i got my concept crystal clear. thankyou!!

This is really helpful , thank you

Thank you so much this helped

Wonderfully explained

thank u so much, it was so informative

THANKYOU, this was very informative and very helpful

This is great GRADACOACH I am not a statistician but I require more of this in my thesis

Include me in your posts.

This is so great and fully useful. I would like to thank you again and again.

Glad to read this article. I’ve read lot of articles but this article is clear on all concepts. Thanks for sharing.

Thank you so much. This is a very good foundation and intro into quantitative data analysis. Appreciate!

You have a very impressive, simple but concise explanation of data analysis for Quantitative Research here. This is a God-send link for me to appreciate research more. Thank you so much!

Avery good presentation followed by the write up. yes you simplified statistics to make sense even to a layman like me. Thank so much keep it up. The presenter did ell too. i would like more of this for Qualitative and exhaust more of the test example like the Anova.

This is a very helpful article, couldn’t have been clearer. Thank you.

Awesome and phenomenal information.Well done

The video with the accompanying article is super helpful to demystify this topic. Very well done. Thank you so much.

thank you so much, your presentation helped me a lot

I don’t know how should I express that ur article is saviour for me 🥺😍

It is well defined information and thanks for sharing. It helps me a lot in understanding the statistical data.

I gain a lot and thanks for sharing brilliant ideas, so wish to be linked on your email update.

Very helpful and clear .Thank you Gradcoach.

Thank for sharing this article, well organized and information presented are very clear.

VERY INTERESTING AND SUPPORTIVE TO NEW RESEARCHERS LIKE ME. AT LEAST SOME BASICS ABOUT QUANTITATIVE.

An outstanding, well explained and helpful article. This will help me so much with my data analysis for my research project. Thank you!

wow this has just simplified everything i was scared of how i am gonna analyse my data but thanks to you i will be able to do so

simple and constant direction to research. thanks

This is helpful

Great writing!! Comprehensive and very helpful.

Do you provide any assistance for other steps of research methodology like making research problem testing hypothesis report and thesis writing?

Thank you so much for such useful article!

Amazing article. So nicely explained. Wow

Very insightfull. Thanks

I am doing a quality improvement project to determine if the implementation of a protocol will change prescribing habits. Would this be a t-test?

The is a very helpful blog, however, I’m still not sure how to analyze my data collected. I’m doing a research on “Free Education at the University of Guyana”

tnx. fruitful blog!

So I am writing exams and would like to know how do establish which method of data analysis to use from the below research questions: I am a bit lost as to how I determine the data analysis method from the research questions.

Do female employees report higher job satisfaction than male employees with similar job descriptions across the South African telecommunications sector? – I though that maybe Chi Square could be used here. – Is there a gender difference in talented employees’ actual turnover decisions across the South African telecommunications sector? T-tests or Correlation in this one. – Is there a gender difference in the cost of actual turnover decisions across the South African telecommunications sector? T-tests or Correlation in this one. – What practical recommendations can be made to the management of South African telecommunications companies on leveraging gender to mitigate employee turnover decisions?

Your assistance will be appreciated if I could get a response as early as possible tomorrow

This was quite helpful. Thank you so much.

wow I got a lot from this article, thank you very much, keep it up

Thanks for yhe guidance. Can you send me this guidance on my email? To enable offline reading?

Thank you very much, this service is very helpful.

Every novice researcher needs to read this article as it puts things so clear and easy to follow. Its been very helpful.

Wonderful!!!! you explained everything in a way that anyone can learn. Thank you!!

I really enjoyed reading though this. Very easy to follow. Thank you

Many thanks for your useful lecture, I would be really appreciated if you could possibly share with me the PPT of presentation related to Data type?

Thank you very much for sharing, I got much from this article

This is a very informative write-up. Kindly include me in your latest posts.

Very interesting mostly for social scientists

Thank you so much, very helpfull

You’re welcome 🙂

woow, its great, its very informative and well understood because of your way of writing like teaching in front of me in simple languages.

I have been struggling to understand a lot of these concepts. Thank you for the informative piece which is written with outstanding clarity.

very informative article. Easy to understand

Beautiful read, much needed.

Always greet intro and summary. I learn so much from GradCoach

Quite informative. Simple and clear summary.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading your informative and inspiring piece. Your profound insights into this topic truly provide a better understanding of its complexity. I agree with the points you raised, especially when you delved into the specifics of the article. In my opinion, that aspect is often overlooked and deserves further attention.

Absolutely!!! Thank you

Thank you very much for this post. It made me to understand how to do my data analysis.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Emotions
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Culture
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Society
• Law and Politics
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Oncology
• Medical Toxicology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Medical Ethics
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Games
• Computer Security
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Cognitive Psychology
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business History
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Methodology
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Theory
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

31 Interpretation In Qualitative Research: What, Why, How

Allen Trent, College of Education, University of Wyoming

Jeasik Cho, Department of Educational Studies, University of Wyoming

• Published: 02 September 2020
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes. Additionally, the chapter presents a series of strategies for qualitative researchers engaged in the process of interpretation and closes by presenting a framework for qualitative researchers designed to inform their interpretations. The framework includes attention to the key qualitative research concepts transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature. Four questions frame the chapter: What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research? How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research? How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation? And, in what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms?

“ All human knowledge takes the form of interpretation.” In this seemingly simple statement, the late German philosopher Walter Benjamin asserted that all knowledge is mediated and constructed. In doing so, he situates himself as an interpretivist, one who believes that human subjectivity, individuals’ characteristics, feelings, opinions, and experiential backgrounds impact observations, analysis of these observations, and resultant knowledge/truth constructions. Hammersley ( 2013 ) noted,

People—unlike atoms … actively interpret or make sense of their environment and of themselves; the ways in which they do this are shaped by the particular cultures in which they live; and these distinctive cultural orientations will strongly influence not only what they believe but also what they do. (p. 26)

Contrast this perspective with positivist claims that knowledge is based exclusively on external facts, objectively observed and recorded. Interpretivists, then, acknowledge that if positivistic notions of knowledge and truth are inadequate to explain social phenomena, then positivist, hard science approaches to research (i.e., the scientific method and its variants) are also inadequate and can even have a detrimental impact. According to Polyani (1967), “The ideal of exact science would turn out to be fundamentally misleading and possibly a source of devastating fallacies” (as cited in Packer, 2018 , p. 71). So, although the literature often contrasts quantitative and qualitative research as largely a difference in kinds of data employed (numerical vs. linguistic), instead, the primary differentiation is in the foundational, paradigmatic assumptions about truth, knowledge, and objectivity.

This chapter is about interpretation and the strategies that qualitative researchers use to interpret a wide variety of “texts.” Knowledge, we assert, is constructed, both individually (constructivism) and socially (constructionism). We accept this as our starting point. Our aim here is to share our perspective on a broad set of concepts associated with the interpretive, or meaning-making, process. Although it may happen at different times and in different ways, interpretation is part of almost all qualitative research.

Qualitative research is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide array of paradigmatic views, goals, and methods. Still, there are key unifying elements that include a generally constructionist epistemological standpoint, attention to primarily linguistic data, and generally accepted protocols or syntax for conducting research. Typically, qualitative researchers begin with a starting point—a curiosity, a problem in need of solutions, a research question, and/or a desire to better understand a situation from the “native” perspectives of the individuals who inhabit that context. This is what anthropologists call the emic , or insider’s, perspective. Olivier de Sardan ( 2015 ) wrote, “It evokes the meaning that social facts have for the actors concerned. It is opposed to the term etic , which, at times, designates more external or ‘objective’ data, and, at others, the researcher’s interpretive analysis” (p. 65).

From this starting point, researchers determine the appropriate kinds of data to collect, engage in fieldwork as participant observers to gather these data, organize the data, look for patterns, and attempt to understand the emic perspectives while integrating their own emergent interpretations. Researchers construct meaning from data by synthesizing research “findings,” “assertions,” or “theories” that can be shared so that others may also gain insights from the conducted inquiry. This interpretive process has a long history; hermeneutics, the theory of interpretation, blossomed in the 17th century in the form of biblical exegesis (Packer, 2018 ).

Although there are commonalities that cut across most forms of qualitative research, this is not to say that there is an accepted, linear, standardized approach. To be sure, there are an infinite number of variations and nuances in the qualitative research process. For example, some forms of inquiry begin with a firm research question; others start without even a clear focus for study. Grounded theorists begin data analysis and interpretation very early in the research process, whereas some case study researchers, for example, may collect data in the field for a period of time before seriously considering the data and its implications. Some ethnographers may be a part of the context (e.g., observing in classrooms), but they may assume more observer-like roles, as opposed to actively participating in the context. Alternatively, action researchers, in studying issues related to their own practice, are necessarily situated toward the participant end of the participant–observer continuum.

Our focus here is on one integrated part of the qualitative research process, interpretation, the hermeneutic process of collective and individual “meaning making.” Like Willig ( 2017 ), we believe “interpretation is at the heart of qualitative research because qualitative research is concerned with meaning and the process of meaning-making … qualitative data … needs to be given meaning by the researcher” (p. 276). As we discuss throughout this chapter, researchers take a variety of approaches to interpretation in qualitative work. Four general questions guide our explorations:

What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research?

How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research?

How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation?

In what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodological and paradigmatic views?

We address each of these guiding questions in our attempt to explicate our interpretation of “interpretation” and, as educational researchers, we include examples from our own work to illustrate some key concepts.

What Is Interpretation, and Why Are Interpretive Strategies Important in Qualitative Research?

Qualitative researchers and those writing about qualitative methods often intertwine the terms analysis and interpretation . For example, Hubbard and Power ( 2003 ) described data analysis as “bringing order, structure, and meaning to the data” (p. 88). To us, this description combines analysis with interpretation. Although there is nothing wrong with this construction, our understanding aligns more closely with Mills’s ( 2018 ) claim that, “put simply, analysis involves summarizing what’s in the data, whereas interpretation involves making sense of—finding meaning in—that data” (p. 176). Hesse-Biber ( 2017 ) also separated out the essential process of interpretation. She described the steps in qualitative analysis and interpretation as data preparation, data exploration, and data reduction (all part of Mills’s “analysis” processes), followed by interpretation (pp. 307–328). Willig ( 2017 ) elaborated: analysis, she claims, is “sober and systematic,” whereas interpretation is associated with “creativity and the imagination … interpretation is seen as stimulating, it is interesting and it can be illuminating” (p. 276). For the purpose of this chapter, we will adhere to Mills’s distinction, understanding analysis as summarizing and organizing and interpretation as meaning making. Unavoidably, these closely related processes overlap and interact, but our focus will be primarily on the more complex of these endeavors, interpretation. Interpretation, in this sense, is in part translation, but translation is not an objective act. Instead, translation necessarily involves selectivity and the ascribing of meaning. Qualitative researchers “aim beneath manifest behavior to the meaning events have for those who experience them” (Eisner, 1991 , p. 35). The presentation of these insider/emic perspectives, coupled with researchers’ own interpretations, is a hallmark of qualitative research.

Qualitative researchers have long borrowed from extant models for fieldwork and interpretation. Approaches from anthropology and the arts have become especially prominent. For example, Eisner’s ( 1991 ) form of qualitative inquiry, educational criticism , draws heavily on accepted models of art criticism. T. Barrett ( 2011 ), an authority on art criticism, described interpretation as a complex set of processes based on a set of principles. We believe many of these principles apply as readily to qualitative research as they do to critique. The following principles, adapted from T. Barrett’s principles of interpretation (2011), inform our examination:

Qualitative phenomena have “aboutness” : All social phenomena have meaning, but meanings in this context can be multiple, even contradictory.

Interpretations are persuasive arguments : All interpretations are arguments, and qualitative researchers, like critics, strive to build strong arguments grounded in the information, or data, available.

  Some interpretations are better than others : Barrett noted that “some interpretations are better argued, better grounded with evidence, and therefore more reasonable, more certain, and more acceptable than others.” This contradicts the argument that “all interpretations are equal,” heard in the common refrain, “Well, that’s just your interpretation.”

There can be different, competing, and contradictory interpretations of the same phenomena : As noted at the beginning of this chapter, we acknowledge that subjectivity matters, and, unavoidably, it impacts one’s interpretations. As Barrett noted, “Interpretations are often based on a worldview.”

Interpretations are not (and cannot be) “right,” but instead, they can be more or less reasonable, convincing, and informative : There is never one “true” interpretation, but some interpretations are more compelling than others.

Interpretations can be judged by coherence, correspondence, and inclusiveness : Does the argument/interpretation make sense (coherence)? Does the interpretation fit the data (correspondence)? Have all data been attended to, including outlier data that do not necessarily support identified themes (inclusiveness)?

Interpretation is ultimately a communal endeavor : Initial interpretations may be incomplete, nearsighted, and/or narrow, but eventually these interpretations become richer, broader, and more inclusive. Feminist revisionist history projects are an exemplary case. Over time, the writing, art, and cultural contributions of countless women, previously ignored, diminished, or distorted, have come to be accepted as prominent contributions given serious consideration.

So, meaning is conferred; interpretations are socially constructed arguments; multiple interpretations are to be expected; and some interpretations are better than others. As we discuss later in this chapter, what makes an interpretation “better” often hinges on the purpose/goals of the research in question. Interpretations designed to generate theory, or generalizable rules, will be better for responding to research questions aligned with the aims of more traditional quantitative/positivist research, whereas interpretations designed to construct meanings through social interaction, to generate multiple perspectives, and to represent the context-specific perspectives of the research participants are better for researchers constructing thick, contextually rich descriptions, stories, or narratives. The former relies on more atomistic interpretive strategies, whereas the latter adheres to a more holistic approach (Willis, 2007 ). Both approaches to analysis/interpretation are addressed in more detail later in this chapter.

At this point, readers might ask, Why does interpretation matter, anyway? Our response to this question involves the distinctive nature of interpretation and the ability of the interpretive process to put unique fingerprints on an otherwise relatively static set of data. Once interview data are collected and transcribed (and we realize that even the process of transcription is, in part, interpretive), documents are collected, and observations are recorded, qualitative researchers could just, in good faith and with fidelity, represent the data in as straightforward ways as possible, allowing readers to “see for themselves” by sharing as much actual data (e.g., the transcribed words of the research participants) as possible. This approach, however, includes analysis, what we have defined as summarizing and organizing data for presentation, but it falls short of what we reference and define as interpretation—attempting to explain the meaning of others’ words and actions. According to Lichtman ( 2013 ),

While early efforts at qualitative research might have stopped at description, it is now more generally accepted that a qualitative researcher goes beyond pure description.… Many believe that it is the role of the researcher to bring understanding, interpretation, and meaning. (p. 17)

Because we are fond of the arts and arts-based approaches to qualitative research, an example from the late jazz drummer, Buddy Rich, seems fitting. Rich explains the importance of having the flexibility to interpret: “I don’t think any arranger should ever write a drum part for a drummer, because if a drummer can’t create his own interpretation of the chart, and he plays everything that’s written, he becomes mechanical; he has no freedom.” The same is true for qualitative researchers: without the freedom to interpret, the researcher merely regurgitates, attempting to share with readers/reviewers exactly what the research subjects shared with him or her. It is only through interpretation that the researcher, as collaborator with unavoidable subjectivities, is able to construct unique, contextualized meaning. Interpretation, then, in this sense, is knowledge construction.

In closing this section, we will illustrate the analysis-versus-interpretation distinction with the following transcript excerpt. In this study, the authors (Trent & Zorko, 2006 ) were studying student teaching from the perspective of K–12 students. This quote comes from a high school student in a focus group interview. She is describing a student teacher she had:

The right-hand column contains codes or labels applied to parts of the transcript text. Coding will be discussed in more depth later in this chapter, but for now, note that the codes are mostly summarizing the main ideas of the text, sometimes using the exact words of the research participant. This type of coding is a part of what we have called analysis—organizing and summarizing the data. It is a way of beginning to say “what is” there. As noted, though, most qualitative researchers go deeper. They want to know more than what is; they also ask, What does it mean? This is a question of interpretation.

Specific to the transcript excerpt, researchers might next begin to cluster the early codes into like groups. For example, the teacher “felt targeted,” “assumed kids were going to behave inappropriately,” and appeared to be “overwhelmed.” A researcher might cluster this group of codes in a category called “teacher feelings and perceptions” and may then cluster the codes “could not control class” and “students off task” into a category called “classroom management.” The researcher then, in taking a fresh look at these categories and the included codes, may begin to conclude that what is going on in this situation is that the student teacher does not have sufficient training in classroom management models and strategies and may also be lacking the skills she needs to build relationships with her students. These then would be interpretations, persuasive arguments connected to the study’s data. In this specific example, the researchers might proceed to write a memo about these emerging interpretations. In this memo, they might more clearly define their early categories and may also look through other data to see if there are other codes or categories that align with or overlap this initial analysis. They may write further about their emergent interpretations and, in doing so, may inform future data collection in ways that will allow them to either support or refute their early interpretations. These researchers will also likely find that the processes of analysis and interpretation are inextricably intertwined. Good interpretations very often depend on thorough and thoughtful analyses.

How Do Methodology, Data, and the Researcher/Self Impact Interpretation in Qualitative Research?

Methodological conventions guide interpretation and the use of interpretive strategies. For example, in grounded theory and in similar methodological traditions, “formal analysis begins early in the study and is nearly completed by the end of data collection” (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007 , p. 73). Alternatively, for researchers from other traditions, for example, case study researchers, “formal analysis and theory development [interpretation] do not occur until after the data collection is near complete” (p. 73).

Researchers subscribing to methodologies that prescribe early data analysis and interpretation may employ methods like analytic induction or the constant comparison method. In using analytic induction, researchers develop a rough definition of the phenomena under study; collect data to compare to this rough definition; modify the definition as needed, based on cases that both fit and do not fit the definition; and, finally, establish a clear, universal definition (theory) of the phenomena (Robinson, 1951, cited in Bogdan & Biklen, 2007 , p. 73). Generally, those using a constant comparison approach begin data collection immediately; identify key issues, events, and activities related to the study that then become categories of focus; collect data that provide incidents of these categories; write about and describe the categories, accounting for specific incidents and seeking others; discover basic processes and relationships; and, finally, code and write about the categories as theory, “grounded” in the data (Glaser, 1965 ). Although processes like analytic induction and constant comparison can be listed as steps to follow, in actuality, these are more typically recursive processes in which the researcher repeatedly goes back and forth between the data and emerging analyses and interpretations.

In addition to methodological conventions that prescribe data analysis early (e.g., grounded theory) or later (e.g., case study) in the inquiry process, methodological approaches also impact the general approach to analysis and interpretation. Ellingson ( 2011 ) situated qualitative research methodologies on a continuum spanning “science”-like approaches on one end juxtaposed with “art”-like approaches on the other.

Researchers pursuing a more science-oriented approach seek valid, reliable, generalizable knowledge; believe in neutral, objective researchers; and ultimately claim single, authoritative interpretations. Researchers adhering to these science-focused, postpositivistic approaches may count frequencies, emphasize the validity of the employed coding system, and point to intercoder reliability and random sampling as criteria that bolster the research credibility. Researchers at or near the science end of the continuum might employ analysis and interpretation strategies that include “paired comparisons,” “pile sorts,” “word counts,” identifying “key words in context,” and “triad tests” (Bernard, Wutich, & Ryan, 2017 , pp. 112, 381, 113, 170). These researchers may ultimately seek to develop taxonomies or other authoritative final products that organize and explain the collected data.

For example, in a study we conducted about preservice teachers’ experiences learning to teach second-language learners, the researchers collected larger data sets and used a statistical analysis package to analyze survey data, and the resultant findings included descriptive statistics. These survey results were supported with open-ended, qualitative data. For example, one of the study’s findings was that “a strong majority of candidates (96%) agreed that an immersion approach alone will not guarantee academic or linguistic success for second language learners.” In narrative explanations, one preservice teacher, representative of many others, remarked, “There has to be extra instructional efforts to help their students learn English … they won’t learn English by merely sitting in the classrooms” (Cho, Rios, Trent, & Mayfield, 2012 , p. 75).

Methodologies on the art side of Ellingson’s ( 2011 ) continuum, alternatively, “value humanistic, openly subjective knowledge, such as that embodied in stories, poetry, photography, and painting” (p. 599). Analysis and interpretation in these (often more contemporary) methodological approaches do not strive for “social scientific truth,” but instead are formulated to “enable us to learn about ourselves, each other, and the world through encountering the unique lens of a person’s (or a group’s) passionate rendering of a reality into a moving, aesthetic expression of meaning” (p. 599). For these “artistic/interpretivists, truths are multiple, fluctuating and ambiguous” (p. 599). Methodologies taking more subjective approaches to analysis and interpretation include autoethnography, testimonio, performance studies, feminist theorists/researchers, and others from related critical methodological forms of qualitative practice. More specifically arts-based approaches include poetic inquiry, fiction-based research, music as method, and dance and movement as inquiry (Leavy, 2017 ). Interpretation in these approaches is inherent. For example, “ interpretive poetry is understood as a method of merging the participant’s words with the researcher’s perspective” (Leavy, 2017 , p. 82).

As an example, one of us engaged in an artistic inquiry with a group of students in an art class for elementary teachers. We called it “Dreams as Data” and, among the project aims, we wanted to gather participants’ “dreams for education in the future” and display these dreams in an accessible, interactive, artistic display (see Trent, 2002 ). The intent was not to statistically analyze the dreams/data; instead, it was more universal. We wanted, as Ellingson ( 2011 , p. 599) noted, to use participant responses in ways that “enable us to learn about ourselves, each other, and the world.” The decision was made to leave responses intact and to share the whole/raw data set in the artistic display in ways that allowed the viewers to holistically analyze and interpret for themselves. Additionally, the researcher (Trent, 2002 ) collaborated with his students to construct their own contextually situated interpretations of the data. The following text is an excerpt from one participant’s response:

Almost a century ago, John Dewey eloquently wrote about the need to imagine and create the education that ALL children deserve, not just the richest, the Whitest, or the easiest to teach. At the dawn of this new century, on some mornings, I wake up fearful that we are further away from this ideal than ever.… Collective action, in a critical, hopeful, joyful, anti-racist and pro-justice spirit, is foremost in my mind as I reflect on and act in my daily work.… Although I realize the constraints on teachers and schools in the current political arena, I do believe in the power of teachers to stand next to, encourage, and believe in the students they teach—in short, to change lives. (Trent, 2002 , p. 49)

In sum, researchers whom Ellingson ( 2011 ) characterized as being on the science end of the continuum typically use more detailed or atomistic strategies to analyze and interpret qualitative data, whereas those toward the artistic end most often employ more holistic strategies. Both general approaches to qualitative data analysis and interpretation, atomistic and holistic, will be addressed later in this chapter.

As noted, qualitative researchers attend to data in a wide variety of ways depending on paradigmatic and epistemological beliefs, methodological conventions, and the purpose/aims of the research. These factors impact the kinds of data collected and the ways these data are ultimately analyzed and interpreted. For example, life history or testimonio researchers conduct extensive individual interviews, ethnographers record detailed observational notes, critical theorists may examine documents from pop culture, and ethnomethodologists may collect videotapes of interaction for analysis and interpretation.

In addition to the wide range of data types that are collected by qualitative researchers (and most qualitative researchers collect multiple forms of data), qualitative researchers, again influenced by the factors noted earlier, employ a variety of approaches to analyzing and interpreting data. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, some advocate for a detailed/atomistic, fine-grained approach to data (see, e.g., Bernard et al., 2017 ); others prefer a more broad-based, holistic, “eyeballing” of the data. According to Willis ( 2007 ), “Eyeballers reject the more structured approaches to analysis that break down the data into small units and, from the perspective of the eyeballers, destroy the wholeness and some of the meaningfulness of the data” (p. 298).

Regardless, we assert, as illustrated in Figure 31.1 , that as the process evolves, data collection becomes less prominent later in the process, as interpretation and making sense/meaning of the data becomes more prominent. It is through this emphasis on interpretation that qualitative researchers put their individual imprints on the data, allowing for the emergence of multiple, rich perspectives. This space for interpretation allows researchers the freedom Buddy Rich alluded to in his quote about interpreting musical charts. Without this freedom, Rich noted that the process would simply be “mechanical.” Furthermore, allowing space for multiple interpretations nourishes the perspectives of many others in the community. Writer and theorist Meg Wheatley explained, “Everyone in a complex system has a slightly different interpretation. The more interpretations we gather, the easier it becomes to gain a sense of the whole.” In qualitative research, “there is no ‘getting it right’ because there could be many ‘rights’ ” (as cited in Lichtman, 2013 ).

Increasing Role of Interpretation in Data Analysis

In addition to the roles methodology and data play in the interpretive process, perhaps the most important is the role of the self/the researcher in the interpretive process. According to Lichtman ( 2013 ), “Data are collected, information is gathered, settings are viewed, and realities are constructed through his or her eyes and ears … the qualitative researcher interprets and makes sense of the data” (p. 21). Eisner ( 1991 ) supported the notion of the researcher “self as instrument,” noting that expert researchers know not simply what to attend to, but also what to neglect. He describes the researcher’s role in the interpretive process as combining sensibility , the ability to observe and ascertain nuances, with schema , a deep understanding or cognitive framework of the phenomena under study.

J. Barrett ( 2007 ) described self/researcher roles as “transformations” (p. 418) at multiple points throughout the inquiry process: early in the process, researchers create representations through data generation, conducting observations and interviews and collecting documents and artifacts. Then,

transformation occurs when the “raw” data generated in the field are shaped into data records by the researcher. These data records are produced through organizing and reconstructing the researcher’s notes and transcribing audio and video recordings in the form of permanent records that serve as the “evidentiary warrants” of the generated data. The researcher strives to capture aspects of the phenomenal world with fidelity by selecting salient aspects to incorporate into the data record. (J. Barrett, 2007 , p. 418)

Transformation continues when the researcher codes, categorizes, and explores patterns in the data (the process we call analysis).

Transformations also involve interpreting what the data mean and relating these interpretations to other sources of insight about the phenomena, including findings from related research, conceptual literature, and common experience.… Data analysis and interpretation are often intertwined and rely upon the researcher’s logic, artistry, imagination, clarity, and knowledge of the field under study. (J. Barrett, 2007 , p. 418)

We mentioned the often-blended roles of participation and observation earlier in this chapter. The role(s) of the self/researcher are often described as points along a participant–observer continuum (see, e.g., Bogdan & Biklen, 2007 ). On the far observer end of this continuum, the researcher situates as detached, tries to be inconspicuous (so as not to impact/disrupt the phenomena under study), and approaches the studied context as if viewing it from behind a one-way mirror. On the opposite, participant end, the researcher is completely immersed and involved in the context. It would be difficult for an outsider to distinguish between researcher and subjects. For example, “some feminist researchers and postmodernists take a political stance and have an agenda that places the researcher in an activist posture. These researchers often become quite involved with the individuals they study and try to improve their human condition” (Lichtman, 2013 , p. 17).

We assert that most researchers fall somewhere between these poles. We believe that complete detachment is both impossible and misguided. In doing so, we, along with many others, acknowledge (and honor) the role of subjectivity, the researcher’s beliefs, opinions, biases, and predispositions. Positivist researchers seeking objective data and accounts either ignore the impact of subjectivity or attempt to drastically diminish/eliminate its impact. Even qualitative researchers have developed methods to avoid researcher subjectivity affecting research data collection, analysis, and interpretation. For example, foundational phenomenologist Husserl ( 1913/1962 ) developed the concept of bracketing , what Lichtman describes as “trying to identify your views on the topic and then putting them aside” (2013, p. 22). Like Slotnick and Janesick ( 2011 ), we ultimately claim “it is impossible to bracket yourself” (p. 1358). Instead, we take a balanced approach, like Eisner, understanding that subjectivity allows researchers to produce the rich, idiosyncratic, insightful, and yet data-based interpretations and accounts of lived experience that accomplish the primary purposes of qualitative inquiry. Eisner ( 1991 ) wrote, “Rather than regarding uniformity and standardization as the summum bonum, educational criticism [Eisner’s form of qualitative research] views unique insight as the higher good” (p. 35). That said, we also claim that, just because we acknowledge and value the role of researcher subjectivity, researchers are still obligated to ground their findings in reasonable interpretations of the data. Eisner ( 1991 ) explained:

This appreciation for personal insight as a source of meaning does not provide a license for freedom. Educational critics must provide evidence and reasons. But they reject the assumption that unique interpretation is a conceptual liability in understanding, and they see the insights secured from multiple views as more attractive than the comforts provided by a single right one. (p. 35)

Connected to this participant–observer continuum is the way the researcher positions him- or herself in relation to the “subjects” of the study. Traditionally, researchers, including early qualitative researchers, anthropologists, and ethnographers, referenced those studied as subjects . More recently, qualitative researchers better understand that research should be a reciprocal process in which both researcher and the foci of the research should derive meaningful benefit. Researchers aligned with this thinking frequently use the term participants to describe those groups and individuals included in a study. Going a step further, some researchers view research participants as experts on the studied topic and as equal collaborators in the meaning-making process. In these instances, researchers often use the terms co-researchers or co-investigators .

The qualitative researcher, then, plays significant roles throughout the inquiry process. These roles include transforming data, collaborating with research participants or co-researchers, determining appropriate points to situate along the participant–observer continuum, and ascribing personal insights, meanings, and interpretations that are both unique and justified with data exemplars. Performing these roles unavoidably impacts and changes the researcher. Slotnick and Janesick ( 2011 ) noted, “Since, in qualitative research the individual is the research instrument through which all data are passed, interpreted, and reported, the scholar’s role is constantly evolving as self evolves” (p. 1358).

As we note later, key in all this is for researchers to be transparent about the topics discussed in the preceding section: What methodological conventions have been employed and why? How have data been treated throughout the inquiry to arrive at assertions and findings that may or may not be transferable to other idiosyncratic contexts? And, finally, in what ways has the researcher/self been situated in and impacted the inquiry? Unavoidably, we assert, the self lies at the critical intersection of data and theory, and, as such, two legs of this stool, data and researcher, interact to create the third, theory.

How Do Qualitative Researchers Engage in the Process of Interpretation?

Theorists seem to have a propensity to dichotomize concepts, pulling them apart and placing binary opposites on the far ends of conceptual continuums. Qualitative research theorists are no different, and we have already mentioned some of these continua in this chapter. For example, in the previous section, we discussed the participant–observer continuum. Earlier, we referenced both Willis’s ( 2007 ) conceptualization of atomistic versus holistic approaches to qualitative analysis and interpretation and Ellingson’s ( 2011 ) science–art continuum. Each of these latter two conceptualizations inform how qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation.

Willis ( 2007 ) shared that the purpose of a qualitative project might be explained as “what we expect to gain from research” (p. 288). The purpose, or what we expect to gain, then guides and informs the approaches researchers might take to interpretation. Some researchers, typically positivist/postpositivist, conduct studies that aim to test theories about how the world works and/or how people behave. These researchers attempt to discover general laws, truths, or relationships that can be generalized. Others, less confident in the ability of research to attain a single, generalizable law or truth, might seek “local theory.” These researchers still seek truths, but “instead of generalizable laws or rules, they search for truths about the local context … to understand what is really happening and then to communicate the essence of this to others” (Willis, 2007 , p. 291). In both these purposes, researchers employ atomistic strategies in an inductive process in which researchers “break the data down into small units and then build broader and broader generalizations as the data analysis proceeds” (p. 317). The earlier mentioned processes of analytic induction, constant comparison, and grounded theory fit within this conceptualization of atomistic approaches to interpretation. For example, a line-by-line coding of a transcript might begin an atomistic approach to data analysis.

Alternatively, other researchers pursue distinctly different aims. Researchers with an objective description purpose focus on accurately describing the people and context under study. These researchers adhere to standards and practices designed to achieve objectivity, and their approach to interpretation falls within the binary atomistic/holistic distinction.

The purpose of hermeneutic approaches to research is to “understand the perspectives of humans. And because understanding is situational, hermeneutic research tends to look at the details of the context in which the study occurred. The result is generally rich data reports that include multiple perspectives” (Willis, 2007 , p. 293).

Still other researchers see their purpose as the creation of stories or narratives that utilize “a social process that constructs meaning through interaction … it is an effort to represent in detail the perspectives of participants … whereas description produces one truth about the topic of study, storytelling may generate multiple perspectives, interpretations, and analyses by the researcher and participants” (Willis, 2007 , p. 295).

In these latter purposes (hermeneutic, storytelling, narrative production), researchers typically employ more holistic strategies. According to Willis ( 2007 ), “Holistic approaches tend to leave the data intact and to emphasize that meaning must be derived for a contextual reading of the data rather than the extraction of data segments for detailed analysis” (p. 297). This was the case with the Dreams as Data project mentioned earlier.

We understand the propensity to dichotomize, situate concepts as binary opposites, and create neat continua between these polar descriptors. These sorts of reduction and deconstruction support our understandings and, hopefully, enable us to eventually reconstruct these ideas in meaningful ways. Still, in reality, we realize most of us will, and should, work in the middle of these conceptualizations in fluid ways that allow us to pursue strategies, processes, and theories most appropriate for the research task at hand. As noted, Ellingson ( 2011 ) set up another conceptual continuum, but, like ours, her advice was to “straddle multiple points across the field of qualitative methods” (p. 595). She explained, “I make the case for qualitative methods to be conceptualized as a continuum anchored by art and science, with vast middle spaces that embody infinite possibilities for blending artistic, expository, and social scientific ways of analysis and representation” (p. 595).

We explained at the beginning of this chapter that we view analysis as organizing and summarizing qualitative data and interpretation as constructing meaning. In this sense, analysis allows us to describe the phenomena under study. It enables us to succinctly answer what and how questions and ensures that our descriptions are grounded in the data collected. Descriptions, however, rarely respond to questions of why . Why questions are the domain of interpretation, and, as noted throughout this text, interpretation is complex. Gubrium and Holstein ( 2000 ) noted, “Traditionally, qualitative inquiry has concerned itself with what and how questions … qualitative researchers typically approach why questions cautiously, explanation is tricky business” (p. 502). Eisner ( 1991 ) described this distinctive nature of interpretation: “It means that inquirers try to account for [interpretation] what they have given account of ” (p. 35).

Our focus here is on interpretation, but interpretation requires analysis, because without clear understandings of the data and its characteristics, derived through systematic examination and organization (e.g., coding, memoing, categorizing), “interpretations” resulting from inquiry will likely be incomplete, uninformed, and inconsistent with the constructed perspectives of the study participants. Fortunately for qualitative researchers, we have many sources that lead us through analytic processes. We earlier mentioned the accepted processes of analytic induction and the constant comparison method. These detailed processes (see, e.g., Bogdan & Biklen, 2007 ) combine the inextricably linked activities of analysis and interpretation, with analysis more typically appearing as earlier steps in the process and meaning construction—interpretation—happening later.

A wide variety of resources support researchers engaged in the processes of analysis and interpretation. Saldaña ( 2011 ), for example, provided a detailed description of coding types and processes. He showed researchers how to use process coding (uses gerunds, “-ing” words to capture action), in vivo coding (uses the actual words of the research participants/ subjects), descriptive coding (uses nouns to summarize the data topics), versus coding (uses “vs” to identify conflicts and power issues), and values coding (identifies participants’ values, attitudes, and/or beliefs). To exemplify some of these coding strategies, we include an excerpt from a transcript of a meeting of a school improvement committee. In this study, the collaborators were focused on building “school community.” This excerpt illustrates the application of a variety of codes described by Saldaña to this text:

To connect and elaborate the ideas developed in coding, Saldaña ( 2011 ) suggested researchers categorize the applied codes, write memos to deepen understandings and illuminate additional questions, and identify emergent themes. To begin the categorization process, Saldaña recommended all codes be “classified into similar clusters … once the codes have been classified, a category label is applied to them” (p. 97). So, in continuing with the study of school community example coded here, the researcher might create a cluster/category called “Value of Collaboration” and in this category might include the codes “relationships,” “building community,” and “effective strategies.”

Having coded and categorized a study’s various data forms, a typical next step for researchers is to write memos or analytic memos . Writing analytic memos allows the researcher(s) to

set in words your interpretation of the data … an analytic memo further articulates your … thinking processes on what things may mean … as the study proceeds, however, initial and substantive analytic memos can be revisited and revised for eventual integration into the report itself. (Saldaña, 2011 , p. 98)

In the study of student teaching from K–12 students’ perspectives (Trent & Zorko, 2006 ), we noticed throughout our analysis a series of focus group interview quotes coded “names.” The following quote from a high school student is representative of many others:

I think that, ah, they [student teachers] should like know your face and your name because, uh, I don’t like it if they don’t and they’ll just like … cause they’ll blow you off a lot easier if they don’t know, like our new principal is here … he is, like, he always, like, tries to make sure to say hi even to the, like, not popular people if you can call it that, you know, and I mean, yah, and the people that don’t usually socialize a lot, I mean he makes an effort to know them and know their name like so they will cooperate better with him.

Although we did not ask the focus groups a specific question about whether student teachers knew the K–12 students’ names, the topic came up in every focus group interview. We coded the above excerpt and the others “knowing names,” and these data were grouped with others under the category “relationships.” In an initial analytic memo about this, the researchers wrote,

STUDENT TEACHING STUDY—MEMO #3 “Knowing Names as Relationship Building” Most groups made unsolicited mentions of student teachers knowing, or not knowing, their names. We haven’t asked students about this, but it must be important to them because it always seems to come up. Students expected student teachers to know their names. When they did, students noticed and seemed pleased. When they didn’t, students seemed disappointed, even annoyed. An elementary student told us that early in the semester, “she knew our names … cause when we rose [sic] our hands, she didn’t have to come and look at our name tags … it made me feel very happy.” A high schooler, expressing displeasure that his student teacher didn’t know students’ names, told us, “They should like know your name because it shows they care about you as a person. I mean, we know their names, so they should take the time to learn ours too.” Another high school student said that even after 3 months, she wasn’t sure the student teacher knew her name. Another student echoed, “Same here.” Each of these students asserted that this (knowing students’ names) had impacted their relationship with the student teacher. This high school student focus group stressed that a good relationship, built early, directly impacts classroom interaction and student learning. A student explained it like this: “If you get to know each other, you can have fun with them … they seem to understand you more, you’re more relaxed, and learning seems easier.”

As noted in these brief examples, coding, categorizing, and writing memos about a study’s data are all accepted processes for data analysis and allow researchers to begin constructing new understandings and forming interpretations of the studied phenomena. We find the qualitative research literature to be particularly strong in offering support and guidance for researchers engaged in these analytic practices. In addition to those already noted in this chapter, we have found the following resources provide practical, yet theoretically grounded approaches to qualitative data analysis. For more detailed, procedural, or atomistic approaches to data analysis, we direct researchers to Miles and Huberman’s classic 1994 text, Qualitative Data Analysis , and Bernard et al.’s 2017 book Analyzing Qualitative Data: Systematic Approaches. For analysis and interpretation strategies falling somewhere between the atomistic and holistic poles, we suggest Hesse-Biber and Leavy’s ( 2011 ) chapter, “Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data,” in their book, The Practice of Qualitative Research (second edition); Lichtman’s chapter, “Making Meaning From Your Data,” in her 2013 book Qualitative Research in Education: A User’s Guide (third edition); and “Processing Fieldnotes: Coding and Memoing,” a chapter in Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw’s ( 1995 ) book, Writing Ethnographic Fieldwork . Each of these sources succinctly describes the processes of data preparation, data reduction, coding and categorizing data, and writing memos about emergent ideas and findings. For more holistic approaches, we have found Denzin and Lincoln’s ( 2007 ) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials and Ellis and Bochner’s ( 2000 ) chapter “Autoethnography, Personal Narrative, Reflexivity” to both be very informative. Finally, Leavy’s 2017 book, Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice , provides support and guidance to researchers engaged in arts-based research.

Even after reviewing the multiple resources for treating data included here, qualitative researchers might still be wondering, But exactly how do we interpret? In the remainder of this section and in the concluding section of this chapter, we more concretely provide responses to this question and, in closing, we propose a framework for researchers to utilize as they engage in the complex, ambiguous, and yet exciting process of constructing meanings and new understandings from qualitative sources.

These meanings and understandings are often presented as theory, but theories in this sense should be viewed more as “guides to perception” as opposed to “devices that lead to the tight control or precise prediction of events” (Eisner, 1991 , p. 95). Perhaps Erickson’s ( 1986 ) concept of assertions is a more appropriate aim for qualitative researchers. He claimed that assertions are declarative statements; they include a summary of the new understandings, and they are supported by evidence/data. These assertions are open to revision and are revised when disconfirming evidence requires modification. Assertions, theories, or other explanations resulting from interpretation in research are typically presented as “findings” in written research reports. Belgrave and Smith ( 2002 ) emphasized the importance of these interpretations (as opposed to descriptions): “The core of the report is not the events reported by the respondent, but rather the subjective meaning of the reported events for the respondent” (p. 248).

Mills ( 2018 ) viewed interpretation as responding to the question, So what? He provided researchers a series of concrete strategies for both analysis and interpretation. Specific to interpretation, Mills (pp. 204–207) suggested a variety of techniques, including the following:

“ Extend the analysis ”: In doing so, researchers ask additional questions about the research. The data appear to say X , but could it be otherwise? In what ways do the data support emergent finding X ? And, in what ways do they not?

“ Connect findings with personal experience ”: Using this technique, researchers share interpretations based on their intimate knowledge of the context, the observed actions of the individuals in the studied context, and the data points that support emerging interpretations, as well as their awareness of discrepant events or outlier data. In a sense, the researcher is saying, “Based on my experiences in conducting this study, this is what I make of it all.”

“ Seek the advice of ‘critical’ friends ”: In doing so, researchers utilize trusted colleagues, fellow researchers, experts in the field of study, and others to offer insights, alternative interpretations, and the application of their own unique lenses to a researcher’s initial findings. We especially like this strategy because we acknowledge that, too often, qualitative interpretation is a “solo” affair.

“ Contextualize findings in the literature ”: This allows researchers to compare their interpretations to those of others writing about and studying the same/similar phenomena. The results of this contextualization may be that the current study’s findings correspond with the findings of other researchers. The results might, alternatively, differ from the findings of other researchers. In either instance, the researcher can highlight his or her unique contributions to our understanding of the topic under study.

“ Turn to theory ”: Mills defined theory as “an analytical and interpretive framework that helps the researcher make sense of ‘what is going on’ in the social setting being studied.” In turning to theory, researchers search for increasing levels of abstraction and move beyond purely descriptive accounts. Connecting to extant or generating new theory enables researchers to link their work to the broader contemporary issues in the field.

Other theorists offer additional advice for researchers engaged in the act of interpretation. Richardson ( 1995 ) reminded us to account for the power dynamics in the researcher–researched relationship and notes that, in doing so, we can allow for oppressed and marginalized voices to be heard in context. Bogdan and Biklen ( 2007 ) suggested that researchers engaged in interpretation revisit foundational writing about qualitative research, read studies related to the current research, ask evaluative questions (e.g., Is what I’m seeing here good or bad?), ask about implications of particular findings/interpretations, think about the audience for interpretations, look for stories and incidents that illustrate a specific finding/interpretation, and attempt to summarize key interpretations in a succinct paragraph. All these suggestions can be pertinent in certain situations and with particular methodological approaches. In the next and closing section of this chapter, we present a framework for interpretive strategies we believe will support, guide, and be applicable to qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms.

In What Ways Can a Framework for Interpretation Strategies Support Qualitative Researchers across Multiple Methodological and Paradigmatic Views?

The process of qualitative research is often compared to a journey, one without a detailed itinerary and ending, but with general direction and aims and yet an open-endedness that adds excitement and thrives on curiosity. Qualitative researchers are travelers. They travel physically to field sites; they travel mentally through various epistemological, theoretical, and methodological grounds; they travel through a series of problem-finding, access, data collection, and data analysis processes; and, finally—the topic of this chapter—they travel through the process of making meaning of all this physical and cognitive travel via interpretation.

Although travel is an appropriate metaphor to describe the journey of qualitative researchers, we will also use “travel” to symbolize a framework for qualitative research interpretation strategies. By design, this framework applies across multiple paradigmatic, epistemological, and methodological traditions. The application of this framework is not formulaic or highly prescriptive; it is also not an anything-goes approach. It falls, and is applicable, between these poles, giving concrete (suggested) direction to qualitative researchers wanting to make the most of the interpretations that result from their research and yet allowing the necessary flexibility for researchers to employ the methods, theories, and approaches they deem most appropriate to the research problem(s) under study.

TRAVEL, a Comprehensive Approach to Qualitative Interpretation

In using the word TRAVEL as a mnemonic device, our aim is to highlight six essential concepts we argue all qualitative researchers should attend to in the interpretive process: transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature. The importance of each is addressed here.

Transparency , as a research concept seems, well, transparent. But, too often, we read qualitative research reports and are left with many questions: How were research participants and the topic of study selected/excluded? How were the data collected, when, and for how long? Who analyzed and interpreted these data? A single researcher? Multiple? What interpretive strategies were employed? Are there data points that substantiate these interpretations/findings? What analytic procedures were used to organize the data prior to making the presented interpretations? In being transparent about data collection, analysis, and interpretation processes, researchers allow reviewers/readers insight into the research endeavor, and this transparency leads to credibility for both researcher and researcher’s claims. Altheide and Johnson ( 2011 ) explained,

There is great diversity of qualitative research.… While these approaches differ, they also share an ethical obligation to make public their claims, to show the reader, audience, or consumer why they should be trusted as faithful accounts of some phenomenon. (p. 584)

This includes, they noted, articulating

what the different sources of data were, how they were interwoven, and … how subsequent interpretations and conclusions are more or less closely tied to the various data … the main concern is that the connection be apparent, and to the extent possible, transparent. (p. 590)

In the Dreams as Data art and research project noted earlier, transparency was addressed in multiple ways. Readers of the project write-up were informed that interpretations resulting from the study, framed as themes , were a result of collaborative analysis that included insights from both students and instructor. Viewers of the art installation/data display had the rare opportunity to see all participant responses. In other words, viewers had access to the entire raw data set (see Trent, 2002 ). More frequently, we encounter only research “findings” already distilled, analyzed, and interpreted in research accounts, often by a single researcher. Allowing research consumers access to the data to interpret for themselves in the Dreams project was an intentional attempt at transparency.

Reflexivity , the second of our concepts for interpretive researcher consideration, has garnered a great deal of attention in qualitative research literature. Some have called this increased attention the reflexive turn (see, e.g., Denzin & Lincoln, 2004 ).

Although you can find many meanings for the term reflexivity, it is usually associated with a critical reflection on the practice and process of research and the role of the researcher. It concerns itself with the impact of the researcher on the system and the system on the researcher. It acknowledges the mutual relationships between the researcher and who and what is studied … by acknowledging the role of the self in qualitative research, the researcher is able to sort through biases and think about how they affect various aspects of the research, especially interpretation of meanings. (Lichtman, 2013 , p. 165)

As with transparency, attending to reflexivity allows researchers to attach credibility to presented findings. Providing a reflexive account of researcher subjectivity and the interactions of this subjectivity within the research process is a way for researchers to communicate openly with their audience. Instead of trying to exhume inherent bias from the process, qualitative researchers share with readers the value of having a specific, idiosyncratic positionality. As a result, situated, contextualized interpretations are viewed as an asset, as opposed to a liability.

LaBanca ( 2011 ), acknowledging the often solitary nature of qualitative research, called for researchers to engage others in the reflexive process. Like many other researchers, LaBanca utilized a researcher journal to chronicle reflexive thoughts, explorations, and understandings, but he took it a step farther. Realizing the value of others’ input, LaBanca posts his reflexive journal entries on a blog (what he calls an online reflexivity blog ) and invites critical friends, other researchers, and interested members of the community to audit his reflexive moves, providing insights, questions, and critique that inform his research and study interpretations.

We agree this is a novel approach worth considering. We, too, understand that multiple interpreters will undoubtedly produce multiple interpretations, a richness of qualitative research. So, we suggest researchers consider bringing others in before the production of the report. This could be fruitful in multiple stages of the inquiry process, but especially in the complex, idiosyncratic processes of reflexivity and interpretation. We are both educators and educational researchers. Historically, each of these roles has tended to be constructed as an isolated endeavor, the solitary teacher, the solo researcher/fieldworker. As noted earlier and in the analysis section that follows, introducing collaborative processes to what has often been a solitary activity offers much promise for generating rich interpretations that benefit from multiple perspectives.

Being consciously reflexive throughout our practice as researchers has benefitted us in many ways. In a study of teacher education curricula designed to prepare preservice teachers to support second-language learners, we realized hard truths that caused us to reflect on and adapt our own practices as teacher educators. Reflexivity can inform a researcher at all parts of the inquiry, even in early stages. For example, one of us was beginning a study of instructional practices in an elementary school. The communicated methods of the study indicated that the researcher would be largely an observer. Early fieldwork revealed that the researcher became much more involved as a participant than anticipated. Deep reflection and writing about the classroom interactions allowed the researcher to realize that the initial purpose of the research was not being accomplished, and the researcher believed he was having a negative impact on the classroom culture. Reflexivity in this instance prompted the researcher to leave the field and abandon the project as it was just beginning. Researchers should plan to openly engage in reflexive activities, including writing about their ongoing reflections and subjectivities. Including excerpts of this writing in research account supports our earlier recommendation of transparency.

Early in this chapter, for the purposes of discussion and examination, we defined analysis as “summarizing and organizing” data in a qualitative study and interpretation as “meaning making.” Although our focus has been on interpretation as the primary topic, the importance of good analysis cannot be underestimated, because without it, resultant interpretations are likely incomplete and potentially uninformed. Comprehensive analysis puts researchers in a position to be deeply familiar with collected data and to organize these data into forms that lead to rich, unique interpretations, and yet interpretations that are clearly connected to data exemplars. Although we find it advantageous to examine analysis and interpretation as different but related practices, in reality, the lines blur as qualitative researchers engage in these recursive processes.

We earlier noted our affinity for a variety of approaches to analysis (see, e.g., Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011 ; Lichtman, 2013 ; or Saldaña, 2011 ). Emerson et al. ( 1995 ) presented a grounded approach to qualitative data analysis: In early stages, researchers engage in a close, line-by-line reading of data/collected text and accompany this reading with open coding , a process of categorizing and labeling the inquiry data. Next, researchers write initial memos to describe and organize the data under analysis. These analytic phases allow the researcher(s) to prepare, organize, summarize, and understand the data, in preparation for the more interpretive processes of focused coding and the writing up of interpretations and themes in the form of integrative memos .

Similarly, Mills ( 2018 ) provided guidance on the process of analysis for qualitative action researchers. His suggestions for organizing and summarizing data include coding (labeling data and looking for patterns); identifying themes by considering the big picture while looking for recurrent phrases, descriptions, or topics; asking key questions about the study data (who, what, where, when, why, and how); developing concept maps (graphic organizers that show initial organization and relationships in the data); and stating what’s missing by articulating what data are not present (pp. 179–189).

Many theorists, like Emerson et al. ( 1995 ) and Mills ( 2018 ) noted here, provide guidance for individual researchers engaged in individual data collection, analysis, and interpretation; others, however, invite us to consider the benefits of collaboratively engaging in these processes through the use of collaborative research and analysis teams. Paulus, Woodside, and Ziegler ( 2008 ) wrote about their experiences in collaborative qualitative research: “Collaborative research often refers to collaboration among the researcher and the participants. Few studies investigate the collaborative process among researchers themselves” (p. 226).

Paulus et al. ( 2008 ) claimed that the collaborative process “challenged and transformed our assumptions about qualitative research” (p. 226). Engaging in reflexivity, analysis, and interpretation as a collaborative enabled these researchers to reframe their views about the research process, finding that the process was much more recursive, as opposed to following a linear progression. They also found that cooperatively analyzing and interpreting data yielded “collaboratively constructed meanings” as opposed to “individual discoveries.” And finally, instead of the traditional “individual products” resulting from solo research, collaborative interpretation allowed researchers to participate in an “ongoing conversation” (p. 226).

These researchers explained that engaging in collaborative analysis and interpretation of qualitative data challenged their previously held assumptions. They noted,

through collaboration, procedures are likely to be transparent to the group and can, therefore, be made public. Data analysis benefits from an iterative, dialogic, and collaborative process because thinking is made explicit in a way that is difficult to replicate as a single researcher. (Paulus et al., 2008 , p. 236)

They shared that, during the collaborative process, “we constantly checked our interpretation against the text, the context, prior interpretations, and each other’s interpretations” (p. 234).

We, too, have engaged in analysis similar to these described processes, including working on research teams. We encourage other researchers to find processes that fit with the methodology and data of a particular study, use the techniques and strategies most appropriate, and then cite the utilized authority to justify the selected path. We urge traditionally solo researchers to consider trying a collaborative approach. Generally, we suggest researchers be familiar with a wide repertoire of practices. In doing so, they will be in better positions to select and use strategies most appropriate for their studies and data. Succinctly preparing, organizing, categorizing, and summarizing data sets the researcher(s) up to construct meaningful interpretations in the forms of assertions, findings, themes, and theories.

Researchers want their findings to be sound, backed by evidence, and justifiable and to accurately represent the phenomena under study. In short, researchers seek validity for their work. We assert that qualitative researchers should attend to validity concepts as a part of their interpretive practices. We have previously written and theorized about validity, and, in doing so, we have highlighted and labeled what we consider two distinctly different approaches, transactional and transformational (Cho & Trent, 2006 ). We define transactional validity in qualitative research as an interactive process occurring among the researcher, the researched, and the collected data, one that is aimed at achieving a relatively higher level of accuracy. Techniques, methods, and/or strategies are employed during the conduct of the inquiry. These techniques, such as member checking and triangulation, are seen as a medium with which to ensure an accurate reflection of reality (or, at least, participants’ constructions of reality). Lincoln and Guba’s ( 1985 ) widely known notion of trustworthiness in “naturalistic inquiry” is grounded in this approach. In seeking trustworthiness, researchers attend to research credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Validity approaches described by Maxwell ( 1992 ) as “descriptive” and “interpretive” also proceed in the usage of transactional processes.

For example, in the write-up of a study on the facilitation of teacher research, one of us (Trent, 2012 ) wrote about the use of transactional processes:

“Member checking is asking the members of the population being studied for their reaction to the findings” (Sagor, 2000 , p. 136). Interpretations and findings of this research, in draft form, were shared with teachers (for member checking) on multiple occasions throughout the study. Additionally, teachers reviewed and provided feedback on the final draft of this article. (p. 44)

This member checking led to changes in some resultant interpretations (called findings in this particular study) and to adaptations of others that shaped these findings in ways that made them both richer and more contextualized.

Alternatively, in transformational approaches, validity is not so much something that can be achieved solely by employing certain techniques. Transformationalists assert that because traditional or positivist inquiry is no longer seen as an absolute means to truth in the realm of human science, alternative notions of validity should be considered to achieve social justice, deeper understandings, broader visions, and other legitimate aims of qualitative research. In this sense, it is the ameliorative aspects of the research that achieve (or do not achieve) its validity. Validity is determined by the resultant actions prompted by the research endeavor.

Lather ( 1993 ), Richardson ( 1997 ), and others (e.g., Lenzo, 1995 ; Scheurich, 1996 ) proposed a transgressive approach to validity that emphasized a higher degree of self-reflexivity. For example, Lather proposed a “catalytic validity” described as “the degree to which the research empowers and emancipates the research subjects” (Scheurich, 1996 , p. 4). Beverley ( 2000 , p. 556) proposed testimonio as a qualitative research strategy. These first-person narratives find their validity in their ability to raise consciousness and thus provoke political action to remedy problems of oppressed peoples (e.g., poverty, marginality, exploitation).

We, too, have pursued research with transformational aims. In the earlier mentioned study of preservice teachers’ experiences learning to teach second-language learners (Cho et al., 2012 ), our aims were to empower faculty members, evolve the curriculum, and, ultimately, better serve preservice teachers so that they might better serve English-language learners in their classrooms. As program curricula and activities have changed as a result, we claim a degree of transformational validity for this research.

Important, then, for qualitative researchers throughout the inquiry, but especially when engaged in the process of interpretation, is to determine the type(s) of validity applicable to the study. What are the aims of the study? Providing an “accurate” account of studied phenomena? Empowering participants to take action for themselves and others? The determination of this purpose will, in turn, inform researchers’ analysis and interpretation of data. Understanding and attending to the appropriate validity criteria will bolster researcher claims to meaningful findings and assertions.

Regardless of purpose or chosen validity considerations, qualitative research depends on evidence . Researchers in different qualitative methodologies rely on different types of evidence to support their claims. Qualitative researchers typically utilize a variety of forms of evidence including texts (written notes, transcripts, images, etc.), audio and video recordings, cultural artifacts, documents related to the inquiry, journal entries, and field notes taken during observations of social contexts and interactions. Schwandt ( 2001 ) wrote,

Evidence is essential to justification, and justification takes the form of an argument about the merit(s) of a given claim. It is generally accepted that no evidence is conclusive or unassailable (and hence, no argument is foolproof). Thus, evidence must often be judged for its credibility, and that typically means examining its source and the procedures by which it was produced [thus the need for transparency discussed earlier]. (p. 82)

Altheide and Johnson ( 2011 ) drew a distinction between evidence and facts:

Qualitative researchers distinguish evidence from facts. Evidence and facts are similar but not identical. We can often agree on facts, e.g., there is a rock, it is harder than cotton candy. Evidence involves an assertion that some facts are relevant to an argument or claim about a relationship. Since a position in an argument is likely tied to an ideological or even epistemological position, evidence is not completely bound by facts, but it is more problematic and subject to disagreement. (p. 586)

Inquirers should make every attempt to link evidence to claims (or findings, interpretations, assertions, conclusions, etc.). There are many strategies for making these connections. Induction involves accumulating multiple data points to infer a general conclusion. Confirmation entails directly linking evidence to resultant interpretations. Testability/falsifiability means illustrating that evidence does not necessarily contradict the claim/interpretation and so increases the credibility of the claim (Schwandt, 2001 ). In the study about learning to teach second-language learners, for example, a study finding (Cho et al., 2012 ) was that “as a moral claim , candidates increasingly [in higher levels of the teacher education program] feel more responsible and committed to … [English language learners]” (p. 77). We supported this finding with a series of data points that included the following preservice teacher response: “It is as much the responsibility of the teacher to help teach second-language learners the English language as it is our responsibility to teach traditional English speakers to read or correctly perform math functions.” Claims supported by evidence allow readers to see for themselves and to both examine researcher assertions in tandem with evidence and form further interpretations of their own.

Some postmodernists reject the notion that qualitative interpretations are arguments based on evidence. Instead, they argue that qualitative accounts are not intended to faithfully represent that experience, but instead are designed to evoke some feelings or reactions in the reader of the account (Schwandt, 2001 ). We argue that, even in these instances where transformational validity concerns take priority over transactional processes, evidence still matters. Did the assertions accomplish the evocative aims? What evidence/arguments were used to evoke these reactions? Does the presented claim correspond with the study’s evidence? Is the account inclusive? In other words, does it attend to all evidence or selectively compartmentalize some data while capitalizing on other evidentiary forms?

Researchers, we argue, should be both transparent and reflexive about these questions and, regardless of research methodology or purpose, should share with readers of the account their evidentiary moves and aims. Altheide and Johnson ( 2011 ) called this an evidentiary narrative and explain:

Ultimately, evidence is bound up with our identity in a situation.… An “evidentiary narrative” emerges from a reconsideration of how knowledge and belief systems in everyday life are tied to epistemic communities that provide perspectives, scenarios, and scripts that reflect symbolic and social moral orders. An “evidentiary narrative” symbolically joins an actor, an audience, a point of view (definition of a situation), assumptions, and a claim about a relationship between two or more phenomena. If any of these factors are not part of the context of meaning for a claim, it will not be honored, and thus, not seen as evidence. (p. 686)

In sum, readers/consumers of a research account deserve to know how evidence was treated and viewed in an inquiry. They want and should be aware of accounts that aim to evoke versus represent, and then they can apply their own criteria (including the potential transferability to their situated context). Renowned ethnographer and qualitative research theorist Harry Wolcott ( 1990 ) urged researchers to “let readers ‘see’ for themselves” by providing more detail rather than less and by sharing primary data/evidence to support interpretations. In the end, readers do not expect perfection. Writer Eric Liu ( 2010 ) explained, “We don’t expect flawless interpretation. We expect good faith. We demand honesty.”

Last, in this journey through concepts we assert are pertinent to researchers engaged in interpretive processes, we include attention to the literature . In discussing literature, qualitative researchers typically mean publications about the prior research conducted on topics aligned with or related to a study. Most often, this research/literature is reviewed and compiled by researchers in a section of the research report titled “Literature Review.” It is here we find others’ studies, methods, and theories related to our topics of study, and it is here we hope the assertions and theories that result from our studies will someday reside.

We acknowledge the value of being familiar with research related to topics of study. This familiarity can inform multiple phases of the inquiry process. Understanding the extant knowledge base can inform research questions and topic selection, data collection and analysis plans, and the interpretive process. In what ways do the interpretations from this study correspond with other research conducted on this topic? Do findings/interpretations corroborate, expand, or contradict other researchers’ interpretations of similar phenomena? In any of these scenarios (correspondence, expansion, contradiction), new findings and interpretations from a study add to and deepen the knowledge base, or literature, on a topic of investigation.

For example, in our literature review for the study of student teaching, we quickly determined that the knowledge base and extant theories related to the student teaching experience were immense, but also quickly realized that few, if any, studies had examined student teaching from the perspective of the K–12 students who had the student teachers. This focus on the literature related to our topic of student teaching prompted us to embark on a study that would fill a gap in this literature: Most of the knowledge base focused on the experiences and learning of the student teachers themselves. Our study, then, by focusing on the K–12 students’ perspectives, added literature/theories/assertions to a previously untapped area. The “literature” in this area (at least we would like to think) is now more robust as a result.

In another example, a research team (Trent et al., 2003 ) focused on institutional diversity efforts, mined the literature, found an appropriate existing (a priori) set of theories/assertions, and then used the existing theoretical framework from the literature as a framework to analyze data, in this case, a variety of institutional activities related to diversity.

Conducting a literature review to explore extant theories on a topic of study can serve a variety of purposes. As evidenced in these examples, consulting the literature/extant theory can reveal gaps in the literature. A literature review might also lead researchers to existing theoretical frameworks that support analysis and interpretation of their data (as in the use of the a priori framework example). Finally, a review of current theories related to a topic of inquiry might confirm that much theory already exists, but that further study may add to, bolster, and/or elaborate on the current knowledge base.

Guidance for researchers conducting literature reviews is plentiful. Lichtman ( 2013 ) suggested researchers conduct a brief literature review, begin research, and then update and modify the literature review as the inquiry unfolds. She suggested reviewing a wide range of related materials (not just scholarly journals) and additionally suggested that researchers attend to literature on methodology, not just the topic of study. She also encouraged researchers to bracket and write down thoughts on the research topic as they review the literature, and, important for this chapter, that researchers “integrate your literature review throughout your writing rather than using a traditional approach of placing it in a separate chapter” (p. 173).

We agree that the power of a literature review to provide context for a study can be maximized when this information is not compartmentalized apart from a study’s findings. Integrating (or at least revisiting) reviewed literature juxtaposed alongside findings can illustrate how new interpretations add to an evolving story. Eisenhart ( 1998 ) expanded the traditional conception of the literature review and discussed the concept of an interpretive review . By taking this interpretive approach, Eisenhart claimed that reviews, alongside related interpretations/findings on a specific topic, have the potential to allow readers to see the studied phenomena in entirely new ways, through new lenses, revealing heretofore unconsidered perspectives. Reviews that offer surprising and enriching perspectives on meanings and circumstances “shake things up, break down boundaries, and cause things (or thinking) to expand” (p. 394). Coupling reviews of this sort with current interpretations will “give us stories that startle us with what we have failed to notice” (p. 395).

In reviews of research studies, it can certainly be important to evaluate the findings in light of established theories and methods [the sorts of things typically included in literature reviews]. However, it also seems important to ask how well the studies disrupt conventional assumptions and help us to reconfigure new, more inclusive, and more promising perspectives on human views and actions. From an interpretivist perspective, it would be most important to review how well methods and findings permit readers to grasp the sense of unfamiliar perspectives and actions. (Eisenhart, 1998 , p. 397)

Though our interpretation-related journey in this chapter nears an end, we are hopeful it is just the beginning of multiple new conversations among ourselves and in concert with other qualitative researchers. Our aims have been to circumscribe interpretation in qualitative research; emphasize the importance of interpretation in achieving the aims of the qualitative project; discuss the interactions of methodology, data, and the researcher/self as these concepts and theories intertwine with interpretive processes; describe some concrete ways that qualitative inquirers engage the process of interpretation; and, finally, provide a framework of interpretive strategies that may serve as a guide for ourselves and other researchers.

In closing, we note that the TRAVEL framework, construed as a journey to be undertaken by researchers engaged in interpretive processes, is not designed to be rigid or prescriptive, but instead is designed to be a flexible set of concepts that will inform researchers across multiple epistemological, methodological, and theoretical paradigms. We chose the concepts of transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature (TRAVEL) because they are applicable to the infinite journeys undertaken by qualitative researchers who have come before and to those who will come after us. As we journeyed through our interpretations of interpretation, we have discovered new things about ourselves and our work. We hope readers also garner insights that enrich their interpretive excursions. Happy travels!

Altheide, D. , & Johnson, J. M. ( 2011 ). Reflections on interpretive adequacy in qualitative research. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 595–610). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Barrett, J. ( 2007 ). The researcher as instrument: Learning to conduct qualitative research through analyzing and interpreting a choral rehearsal.   Music Education Research, 9, 417–433.

Barrett, T. ( 2011 ). Criticizing art: Understanding the contemporary (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw–Hill.

Belgrave, L. L. , & Smith, K. J. ( 2002 ). Negotiated validity in collaborative ethnography. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The qualitative inquiry reader (pp. 233–255). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bernard, H. R. , Wutich, A. , & Ryan, G. W. ( 2017 ). Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Beverly, J. ( 2000 ). Testimonio, subalternity, and narrative authority. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 555–566). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bogdan, R. C. , & Biklen, S. K. ( 2007 ). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Cho, J. , Rios, F. , Trent, A. , & Mayfield, K. ( 2012 ). Integrating language diversity into teacher education curricula in a rural context: Candidates’ developmental perspectives and understandings.   Teacher Education Quarterly, 39(2), 63–85.

Cho, J. , & Trent, A. ( 2006 ). Validity in qualitative research revisited.   QR—Qualitative Research Journal, 6, 319–340.

Denzin, N. M. , & Lincoln, Y. S . (Eds.). ( 2004 ). Handbook of qualitative research . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. M. , & Lincoln, Y. S. ( 2007 ). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eisenhart, M. ( 1998 ). On the subject of interpretive reviews.   Review of Educational Research, 68, 391–393.

Eisner, E. ( 1991 ). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice . New York, NY: Macmillan.

Ellingson, L. L. ( 2011 ). Analysis and representation across the continuum. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 595–610). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ellis, C. , & Bochner, A. P. ( 2000 ). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Emerson, R. , Fretz, R. , & Shaw, L. ( 1995 ). Writing ethnographic fieldwork . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Erickson, F. ( 1986 ). Qualitative methods in research in teaching and learning. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp 119–161). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Glaser, B. ( 1965 ). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis.   Social Problems, 12, 436–445.

Gubrium, J. F. , & Holstein, J. A. ( 2000 ). Analyzing interpretive practice. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 487–508). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hammersley, M. ( 2013 ). What is qualitative research? London, England: Bloomsbury Academic.

Hesse-Biber, S. N. ( 2017 ). The practice of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hesse-Biber, S. N. , & Leavy, P. ( 2011 ). The practice of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hubbard, R. S. , & Power, B. M. ( 2003 ). The art of classroom inquiry: A handbook for teacher researchers . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Husserl, E. ( 1913 /1962). Ideas: general introduction to pure phenomenology (W. R. Boyce Gibson, Trans.). London, England: Collier.

LaBanca, F. ( 2011 ). Online dynamic asynchronous audit strategy for reflexivity in the qualitative paradigm.   Qualitative Report, 16, 1160–1171.

Lather, P. ( 1993 ). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism.   Sociological Quarterly, 34, 673–693.

Leavy, P. ( 2017 ). Method meets art: Arts-based research practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Lenzo, K. ( 1995 ). Validity and self reflexivity meet poststructuralism: Scientific ethos and the transgressive self.   Educational Researcher, 24(4), 17–23, 45.

Lichtman, M. ( 2013 ). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S. , & Guba, E. G. ( 1985 ). Naturalistic inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Liu, E. (2010). The real meaning of balls and strikes . Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-liu/the-real-meaning-of-balls_b_660915.html

Maxwell, J. ( 1992 ). Understanding and validity in qualitative research.   Harvard Educational Review, 62, 279–300.

Miles, M. B. , & Huberman, A. M. ( 1994 ). Qualitative data analysis . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mills, G. E. ( 2018 ). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Olivier de Sardan, J. P. ( 2015 ). Epistemology, fieldwork, and anthropology. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Packer, M. J. ( 2018 ). The science of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Paulus, T. , Woodside, M. , & Ziegler, M. ( 2008 ). Extending the conversation: Qualitative research as dialogic collaborative process.   Qualitative Report, 13, 226–243.

Richardson, L. ( 1995 ). Writing stories: Co-authoring the “sea monster,” a writing story.   Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 189–203.

Richardson, L. ( 1997 ). Fields of play: Constructing an academic life . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Sagor, R. ( 2000 ). Guiding school improvement with action research . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Saldaña, J. ( 2011 ). Fundamentals of qualitative research . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Scheurich, J. ( 1996 ). The masks of validity: A deconstructive investigation.   Qualitative Studies in Education, 9, 49–60.

Schwandt, T. A. ( 2001 ). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Slotnick, R. C. , & Janesick, V. J. ( 2011 ). Conversations on method: Deconstructing policy through the researcher reflective journal.   Qualitative Report, 16, 1352–1360.

Trent, A. ( 2002 ). Dreams as data: Art installation as heady research,   Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(4), 39–51.

Trent, A. ( 2012 ). Action research on action research: A facilitator’s account.   Action Learning and Action Research Journal, 18, 35–67.

Trent, A. , Rios, F. , Antell, J. , Berube, W. , Bialostok, S. , Cardona, D. , … Rush, T. ( 2003 ). Problems and possibilities in the pursuit of diversity: An institutional analysis.   Equity & Excellence, 36, 213–224.

Trent, A. , & Zorko, L. ( 2006 ). Listening to students: “New” perspectives on student teaching.   Teacher Education & Practice, 19, 55–70.

Willig, C. ( 2017 ). Interpretation in qualitative research. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (2nd ed., pp. 267–290). London, England: Sage.

Willis, J. W. ( 2007 ). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wolcott, H. ( 1990 ). On seeking-and rejecting-validity in qualitative research. In E. Eisner & A. Peshkin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp. 121–152). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Practical Research Guidance

"The publications and resources helped me get a first-class degree." – Joanna Dunlop, MBA.

Analysing and interpreting data

Analysis and interpretation: What is the difference between analysing and interpreting data? Analysis is the process of translating raw, messy data into something recognisable and understandable. Interpretation generates meaning from this analysis and conveys that meaning to others. A highly structured approach is required to analyse and interpret your data. By being systematic with your analysis and interpretation, you can produce findings of real value.

How textbook helps: The book, A nalysing And Interpreting Your Data , is a useful resource explaining how to prepare data for analysis and interpretation. With its guidance, you can analyse and give meaning to numbers and words that may, at first, appear meaningless. Additionally, the publication describes how to interpret your analysis by making your data accessible to, and comparable by, you and others.

Student story: Muhammad had a large amount of relatively unstructured data from different sources. Following the book’s advice, Muhammad was able to check and prepare his data. It also assisted him to analyse and interpret his data in a logical manner. Muhammad extracted robust results from his survey data with in-depth statistical analysis. Using thematic analysis, he identified the emergent themes from his interview transcripts. Consequently, Muhammad was able to generate credible findings for his dissertation.

“The textbook was excellent. It helped me to get the most out of my data. Without it, I would not have properly planned and conducted such a first-rate analysis and interpretation.” Muhammad Mahdl, MSc Supply Chain Management.

Jump to navigation

Cochrane Training

Chapter 15: interpreting results and drawing conclusions.

Holger J Schünemann, Gunn E Vist, Julian PT Higgins, Nancy Santesso, Jonathan J Deeks, Paul Glasziou, Elie A Akl, Gordon H Guyatt; on behalf of the Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group

Key Points:

• This chapter provides guidance on interpreting the results of synthesis in order to communicate the conclusions of the review effectively.
• Methods are presented for computing, presenting and interpreting relative and absolute effects for dichotomous outcome data, including the number needed to treat (NNT).
• For continuous outcome measures, review authors can present summary results for studies using natural units of measurement or as minimal important differences when all studies use the same scale. When studies measure the same construct but with different scales, review authors will need to find a way to interpret the standardized mean difference, or to use an alternative effect measure for the meta-analysis such as the ratio of means.
• Review authors should not describe results as ‘statistically significant’, ‘not statistically significant’ or ‘non-significant’ or unduly rely on thresholds for P values, but report the confidence interval together with the exact P value.
• Review authors should not make recommendations about healthcare decisions, but they can – after describing the certainty of evidence and the balance of benefits and harms – highlight different actions that might be consistent with particular patterns of values and preferences and other factors that determine a decision such as cost.

Cite this chapter as: Schünemann HJ, Vist GE, Higgins JPT, Santesso N, Deeks JJ, Glasziou P, Akl EA, Guyatt GH. Chapter 15: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.4 (updated August 2023). Cochrane, 2023. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook .

15.1 Introduction

The purpose of Cochrane Reviews is to facilitate healthcare decisions by patients and the general public, clinicians, guideline developers, administrators and policy makers. They also inform future research. A clear statement of findings, a considered discussion and a clear presentation of the authors’ conclusions are, therefore, important parts of the review. In particular, the following issues can help people make better informed decisions and increase the usability of Cochrane Reviews:

• information on all important outcomes, including adverse outcomes;
• the certainty of the evidence for each of these outcomes, as it applies to specific populations and specific interventions; and
• clarification of the manner in which particular values and preferences may bear on the desirable and undesirable consequences of the intervention.

A ‘Summary of findings’ table, described in Chapter 14 , Section 14.1 , provides key pieces of information about health benefits and harms in a quick and accessible format. It is highly desirable that review authors include a ‘Summary of findings’ table in Cochrane Reviews alongside a sufficient description of the studies and meta-analyses to support its contents. This description includes the rating of the certainty of evidence, also called the quality of the evidence or confidence in the estimates of the effects, which is expected in all Cochrane Reviews.

‘Summary of findings’ tables are usually supported by full evidence profiles which include the detailed ratings of the evidence (Guyatt et al 2011a, Guyatt et al 2013a, Guyatt et al 2013b, Santesso et al 2016). The Discussion section of the text of the review provides space to reflect and consider the implications of these aspects of the review’s findings. Cochrane Reviews include five standard subheadings to ensure the Discussion section places the review in an appropriate context: ‘Summary of main results (benefits and harms)’; ‘Potential biases in the review process’; ‘Overall completeness and applicability of evidence’; ‘Certainty of the evidence’; and ‘Agreements and disagreements with other studies or reviews’. Following the Discussion, the Authors’ conclusions section is divided into two standard subsections: ‘Implications for practice’ and ‘Implications for research’. The assessment of the certainty of evidence facilitates a structured description of the implications for practice and research.

Because Cochrane Reviews have an international audience, the Discussion and Authors’ conclusions should, so far as possible, assume a broad international perspective and provide guidance for how the results could be applied in different settings, rather than being restricted to specific national or local circumstances. Cultural differences and economic differences may both play an important role in determining the best course of action based on the results of a Cochrane Review. Furthermore, individuals within societies have widely varying values and preferences regarding health states, and use of societal resources to achieve particular health states. For all these reasons, and because information that goes beyond that included in a Cochrane Review is required to make fully informed decisions, different people will often make different decisions based on the same evidence presented in a review.

Thus, review authors should avoid specific recommendations that inevitably depend on assumptions about available resources, values and preferences, and other factors such as equity considerations, feasibility and acceptability of an intervention. The purpose of the review should be to present information and aid interpretation rather than to offer recommendations. The discussion and conclusions should help people understand the implications of the evidence in relation to practical decisions and apply the results to their specific situation. Review authors can aid this understanding of the implications by laying out different scenarios that describe certain value structures.

In this chapter, we address first one of the key aspects of interpreting findings that is also fundamental in completing a ‘Summary of findings’ table: the certainty of evidence related to each of the outcomes. We then provide a more detailed consideration of issues around applicability and around interpretation of numerical results, and provide suggestions for presenting authors’ conclusions.

15.2 Issues of indirectness and applicability

15.2.1 the role of the review author.

“A leap of faith is always required when applying any study findings to the population at large” or to a specific person. “In making that jump, one must always strike a balance between making justifiable broad generalizations and being too conservative in one’s conclusions” (Friedman et al 1985). In addition to issues about risk of bias and other domains determining the certainty of evidence, this leap of faith is related to how well the identified body of evidence matches the posed PICO ( Population, Intervention, Comparator(s) and Outcome ) question. As to the population, no individual can be entirely matched to the population included in research studies. At the time of decision, there will always be differences between the study population and the person or population to whom the evidence is applied; sometimes these differences are slight, sometimes large.

The terms applicability, generalizability, external validity and transferability are related, sometimes used interchangeably and have in common that they lack a clear and consistent definition in the classic epidemiological literature (Schünemann et al 2013). However, all of the terms describe one overarching theme: whether or not available research evidence can be directly used to answer the health and healthcare question at hand, ideally supported by a judgement about the degree of confidence in this use (Schünemann et al 2013). GRADE’s certainty domains include a judgement about ‘indirectness’ to describe all of these aspects including the concept of direct versus indirect comparisons of different interventions (Atkins et al 2004, Guyatt et al 2008, Guyatt et al 2011b).

To address adequately the extent to which a review is relevant for the purpose to which it is being put, there are certain things the review author must do, and certain things the user of the review must do to assess the degree of indirectness. Cochrane and the GRADE Working Group suggest using a very structured framework to address indirectness. We discuss here and in Chapter 14 what the review author can do to help the user. Cochrane Review authors must be extremely clear on the population, intervention and outcomes that they intend to address. Chapter 14, Section 14.1.2 , also emphasizes a crucial step: the specification of all patient-important outcomes relevant to the intervention strategies under comparison.

In considering whether the effect of an intervention applies equally to all participants, and whether different variations on the intervention have similar effects, review authors need to make a priori hypotheses about possible effect modifiers, and then examine those hypotheses (see Chapter 10, Section 10.10 and Section 10.11 ). If they find apparent subgroup effects, they must ultimately decide whether or not these effects are credible (Sun et al 2012). Differences between subgroups, particularly those that correspond to differences between studies, should be interpreted cautiously. Some chance variation between subgroups is inevitable so, unless there is good reason to believe that there is an interaction, review authors should not assume that the subgroup effect exists. If, despite due caution, review authors judge subgroup effects in terms of relative effect estimates as credible (i.e. the effects differ credibly), they should conduct separate meta-analyses for the relevant subgroups, and produce separate ‘Summary of findings’ tables for those subgroups.

The user of the review will be challenged with ‘individualization’ of the findings, whether they seek to apply the findings to an individual patient or a policy decision in a specific context. For example, even if relative effects are similar across subgroups, absolute effects will differ according to baseline risk. Review authors can help provide this information by identifying identifiable groups of people with varying baseline risks in the ‘Summary of findings’ tables, as discussed in Chapter 14, Section 14.1.3 . Users can then identify their specific case or population as belonging to a particular risk group, if relevant, and assess their likely magnitude of benefit or harm accordingly. A description of the identifying prognostic or baseline risk factors in a brief scenario (e.g. age or gender) will help users of a review further.

Another decision users must make is whether their individual case or population of interest is so different from those included in the studies that they cannot use the results of the systematic review and meta-analysis at all. Rather than rigidly applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria of studies, it is better to ask whether or not there are compelling reasons why the evidence should not be applied to a particular patient. Review authors can sometimes help decision makers by identifying important variation where divergence might limit the applicability of results (Rothwell 2005, Schünemann et al 2006, Guyatt et al 2011b, Schünemann et al 2013), including biologic and cultural variation, and variation in adherence to an intervention.

In addressing these issues, review authors cannot be aware of, or address, the myriad of differences in circumstances around the world. They can, however, address differences of known importance to many people and, importantly, they should avoid assuming that other people’s circumstances are the same as their own in discussing the results and drawing conclusions.

15.2.2 Biological variation

Issues of biological variation that may affect the applicability of a result to a reader or population include divergence in pathophysiology (e.g. biological differences between women and men that may affect responsiveness to an intervention) and divergence in a causative agent (e.g. for infectious diseases such as malaria, which may be caused by several different parasites). The discussion of the results in the review should make clear whether the included studies addressed all or only some of these groups, and whether any important subgroup effects were found.

15.2.3 Variation in context

Some interventions, particularly non-pharmacological interventions, may work in some contexts but not in others; the situation has been described as program by context interaction (Hawe et al 2004). Contextual factors might pertain to the host organization in which an intervention is offered, such as the expertise, experience and morale of the staff expected to carry out the intervention, the competing priorities for the clinician’s or staff’s attention, the local resources such as service and facilities made available to the program and the status or importance given to the program by the host organization. Broader context issues might include aspects of the system within which the host organization operates, such as the fee or payment structure for healthcare providers and the local insurance system. Some interventions, in particular complex interventions (see Chapter 17 ), can be only partially implemented in some contexts, and this requires judgements about indirectness of the intervention and its components for readers in that context (Schünemann 2013).

Contextual factors may also pertain to the characteristics of the target group or population, such as cultural and linguistic diversity, socio-economic position, rural/urban setting. These factors may mean that a particular style of care or relationship evolves between service providers and consumers that may or may not match the values and technology of the program.

For many years these aspects have been acknowledged when decision makers have argued that results of evidence reviews from other countries do not apply in their own country or setting. Whilst some programmes/interventions have been successfully transferred from one context to another, others have not (Resnicow et al 1993, Lumley et al 2004, Coleman et al 2015). Review authors should be cautious when making generalizations from one context to another. They should report on the presence (or otherwise) of context-related information in intervention studies, where this information is available.

15.2.4 Variation in adherence

Variation in the adherence of the recipients and providers of care can limit the certainty in the applicability of results. Predictable differences in adherence can be due to divergence in how recipients of care perceive the intervention (e.g. the importance of side effects), economic conditions or attitudes that make some forms of care inaccessible in some settings, such as in low-income countries (Dans et al 2007). It should not be assumed that high levels of adherence in closely monitored randomized trials will translate into similar levels of adherence in normal practice.

15.2.5 Variation in values and preferences

Decisions about healthcare management strategies and options involve trading off health benefits and harms. The right choice may differ for people with different values and preferences (i.e. the importance people place on the outcomes and interventions), and it is important that decision makers ensure that decisions are consistent with a patient or population’s values and preferences. The importance placed on outcomes, together with other factors, will influence whether the recipients of care will or will not accept an option that is offered (Alonso-Coello et al 2016) and, thus, can be one factor influencing adherence. In Section 15.6 , we describe how the review author can help this process and the limits of supporting decision making based on intervention reviews.

15.3 Interpreting results of statistical analyses

15.3.1 confidence intervals.

Results for both individual studies and meta-analyses are reported with a point estimate together with an associated confidence interval. For example, ‘The odds ratio was 0.75 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.70 to 0.80’. The point estimate (0.75) is the best estimate of the magnitude and direction of the experimental intervention’s effect compared with the comparator intervention. The confidence interval describes the uncertainty inherent in any estimate, and describes a range of values within which we can be reasonably sure that the true effect actually lies. If the confidence interval is relatively narrow (e.g. 0.70 to 0.80), the effect size is known precisely. If the interval is wider (e.g. 0.60 to 0.93) the uncertainty is greater, although there may still be enough precision to make decisions about the utility of the intervention. Intervals that are very wide (e.g. 0.50 to 1.10) indicate that we have little knowledge about the effect and this imprecision affects our certainty in the evidence, and that further information would be needed before we could draw a more certain conclusion.

A 95% confidence interval is often interpreted as indicating a range within which we can be 95% certain that the true effect lies. This statement is a loose interpretation, but is useful as a rough guide. The strictly correct interpretation of a confidence interval is based on the hypothetical notion of considering the results that would be obtained if the study were repeated many times. If a study were repeated infinitely often, and on each occasion a 95% confidence interval calculated, then 95% of these intervals would contain the true effect (see Section 15.3.3 for further explanation).

The width of the confidence interval for an individual study depends to a large extent on the sample size. Larger studies tend to give more precise estimates of effects (and hence have narrower confidence intervals) than smaller studies. For continuous outcomes, precision depends also on the variability in the outcome measurements (i.e. how widely individual results vary between people in the study, measured as the standard deviation); for dichotomous outcomes it depends on the risk of the event (more frequent events allow more precision, and narrower confidence intervals), and for time-to-event outcomes it also depends on the number of events observed. All these quantities are used in computation of the standard errors of effect estimates from which the confidence interval is derived.

The width of a confidence interval for a meta-analysis depends on the precision of the individual study estimates and on the number of studies combined. In addition, for random-effects models, precision will decrease with increasing heterogeneity and confidence intervals will widen correspondingly (see Chapter 10, Section 10.10.4 ). As more studies are added to a meta-analysis the width of the confidence interval usually decreases. However, if the additional studies increase the heterogeneity in the meta-analysis and a random-effects model is used, it is possible that the confidence interval width will increase.

Confidence intervals and point estimates have different interpretations in fixed-effect and random-effects models. While the fixed-effect estimate and its confidence interval address the question ‘what is the best (single) estimate of the effect?’, the random-effects estimate assumes there to be a distribution of effects, and the estimate and its confidence interval address the question ‘what is the best estimate of the average effect?’ A confidence interval may be reported for any level of confidence (although they are most commonly reported for 95%, and sometimes 90% or 99%). For example, the odds ratio of 0.80 could be reported with an 80% confidence interval of 0.73 to 0.88; a 90% interval of 0.72 to 0.89; and a 95% interval of 0.70 to 0.92. As the confidence level increases, the confidence interval widens.

There is logical correspondence between the confidence interval and the P value (see Section 15.3.3 ). The 95% confidence interval for an effect will exclude the null value (such as an odds ratio of 1.0 or a risk difference of 0) if and only if the test of significance yields a P value of less than 0.05. If the P value is exactly 0.05, then either the upper or lower limit of the 95% confidence interval will be at the null value. Similarly, the 99% confidence interval will exclude the null if and only if the test of significance yields a P value of less than 0.01.

Together, the point estimate and confidence interval provide information to assess the effects of the intervention on the outcome. For example, suppose that we are evaluating an intervention that reduces the risk of an event and we decide that it would be useful only if it reduced the risk of an event from 30% by at least 5 percentage points to 25% (these values will depend on the specific clinical scenario and outcomes, including the anticipated harms). If the meta-analysis yielded an effect estimate of a reduction of 10 percentage points with a tight 95% confidence interval, say, from 7% to 13%, we would be able to conclude that the intervention was useful since both the point estimate and the entire range of the interval exceed our criterion of a reduction of 5% for net health benefit. However, if the meta-analysis reported the same risk reduction of 10% but with a wider interval, say, from 2% to 18%, although we would still conclude that our best estimate of the intervention effect is that it provides net benefit, we could not be so confident as we still entertain the possibility that the effect could be between 2% and 5%. If the confidence interval was wider still, and included the null value of a difference of 0%, we would still consider the possibility that the intervention has no effect on the outcome whatsoever, and would need to be even more sceptical in our conclusions.

Review authors may use the same general approach to conclude that an intervention is not useful. Continuing with the above example where the criterion for an important difference that should be achieved to provide more benefit than harm is a 5% risk difference, an effect estimate of 2% with a 95% confidence interval of 1% to 4% suggests that the intervention does not provide net health benefit.

15.3.2 P values and statistical significance

A P value is the standard result of a statistical test, and is the probability of obtaining the observed effect (or larger) under a ‘null hypothesis’. In the context of Cochrane Reviews there are two commonly used statistical tests. The first is a test of overall effect (a Z-test), and its null hypothesis is that there is no overall effect of the experimental intervention compared with the comparator on the outcome of interest. The second is the (Chi 2 ) test for heterogeneity, and its null hypothesis is that there are no differences in the intervention effects across studies.

A P value that is very small indicates that the observed effect is very unlikely to have arisen purely by chance, and therefore provides evidence against the null hypothesis. It has been common practice to interpret a P value by examining whether it is smaller than particular threshold values. In particular, P values less than 0.05 are often reported as ‘statistically significant’, and interpreted as being small enough to justify rejection of the null hypothesis. However, the 0.05 threshold is an arbitrary one that became commonly used in medical and psychological research largely because P values were determined by comparing the test statistic against tabulations of specific percentage points of statistical distributions. If review authors decide to present a P value with the results of a meta-analysis, they should report a precise P value (as calculated by most statistical software), together with the 95% confidence interval. Review authors should not describe results as ‘statistically significant’, ‘not statistically significant’ or ‘non-significant’ or unduly rely on thresholds for P values , but report the confidence interval together with the exact P value (see MECIR Box 15.3.a ).

We discuss interpretation of the test for heterogeneity in Chapter 10, Section 10.10.2 ; the remainder of this section refers mainly to tests for an overall effect. For tests of an overall effect, the computation of P involves both the effect estimate and precision of the effect estimate (driven largely by sample size). As precision increases, the range of plausible effects that could occur by chance is reduced. Correspondingly, the statistical significance of an effect of a particular magnitude will usually be greater (the P value will be smaller) in a larger study than in a smaller study.

P values are commonly misinterpreted in two ways. First, a moderate or large P value (e.g. greater than 0.05) may be misinterpreted as evidence that the intervention has no effect on the outcome. There is an important difference between this statement and the correct interpretation that there is a high probability that the observed effect on the outcome is due to chance alone. To avoid such a misinterpretation, review authors should always examine the effect estimate and its 95% confidence interval.

The second misinterpretation is to assume that a result with a small P value for the summary effect estimate implies that an experimental intervention has an important benefit. Such a misinterpretation is more likely to occur in large studies and meta-analyses that accumulate data over dozens of studies and thousands of participants. The P value addresses the question of whether the experimental intervention effect is precisely nil; it does not examine whether the effect is of a magnitude of importance to potential recipients of the intervention. In a large study, a small P value may represent the detection of a trivial effect that may not lead to net health benefit when compared with the potential harms (i.e. harmful effects on other important outcomes). Again, inspection of the point estimate and confidence interval helps correct interpretations (see Section 15.3.1 ).

MECIR Box 15.3.a Relevant expectations for conduct of intervention reviews

15.3.3 Relation between confidence intervals, statistical significance and certainty of evidence

The confidence interval (and imprecision) is only one domain that influences overall uncertainty about effect estimates. Uncertainty resulting from imprecision (i.e. statistical uncertainty) may be no less important than uncertainty from indirectness, or any other GRADE domain, in the context of decision making (Schünemann 2016). Thus, the extent to which interpretations of the confidence interval described in Sections 15.3.1 and 15.3.2 correspond to conclusions about overall certainty of the evidence for the outcome of interest depends on these other domains. If there are no concerns about other domains that determine the certainty of the evidence (i.e. risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness or publication bias), then the interpretation in Sections 15.3.1 and 15.3.2 . about the relation of the confidence interval to the true effect may be carried forward to the overall certainty. However, if there are concerns about the other domains that affect the certainty of the evidence, the interpretation about the true effect needs to be seen in the context of further uncertainty resulting from those concerns.

For example, nine randomized controlled trials in almost 6000 cancer patients indicated that the administration of heparin reduces the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), with a risk ratio of 43% (95% CI 19% to 60%) (Akl et al 2011a). For patients with a plausible baseline risk of approximately 4.6% per year, this relative effect suggests that heparin leads to an absolute risk reduction of 20 fewer VTEs (95% CI 9 fewer to 27 fewer) per 1000 people per year (Akl et al 2011a). Now consider that the review authors or those applying the evidence in a guideline have lowered the certainty in the evidence as a result of indirectness. While the confidence intervals would remain unchanged, the certainty in that confidence interval and in the point estimate as reflecting the truth for the question of interest will be lowered. In fact, the certainty range will have unknown width so there will be unknown likelihood of a result within that range because of this indirectness. The lower the certainty in the evidence, the less we know about the width of the certainty range, although methods for quantifying risk of bias and understanding potential direction of bias may offer insight when lowered certainty is due to risk of bias. Nevertheless, decision makers must consider this uncertainty, and must do so in relation to the effect measure that is being evaluated (e.g. a relative or absolute measure). We will describe the impact on interpretations for dichotomous outcomes in Section 15.4 .

15.4 Interpreting results from dichotomous outcomes (including numbers needed to treat)

15.4.1 relative and absolute risk reductions.

Clinicians may be more inclined to prescribe an intervention that reduces the relative risk of death by 25% than one that reduces the risk of death by 1 percentage point, although both presentations of the evidence may relate to the same benefit (i.e. a reduction in risk from 4% to 3%). The former refers to the relative reduction in risk and the latter to the absolute reduction in risk. As described in Chapter 6, Section 6.4.1 , there are several measures for comparing dichotomous outcomes in two groups. Meta-analyses are usually undertaken using risk ratios (RR), odds ratios (OR) or risk differences (RD), but there are several alternative ways of expressing results.

Relative risk reduction (RRR) is a convenient way of re-expressing a risk ratio as a percentage reduction:

For example, a risk ratio of 0.75 translates to a relative risk reduction of 25%, as in the example above.

The risk difference is often referred to as the absolute risk reduction (ARR) or absolute risk increase (ARI), and may be presented as a percentage (e.g. 1%), as a decimal (e.g. 0.01), or as account (e.g. 10 out of 1000). We consider different choices for presenting absolute effects in Section 15.4.3 . We then describe computations for obtaining these numbers from the results of individual studies and of meta-analyses in Section 15.4.4 .

15.4.2 Number needed to treat (NNT)

The number needed to treat (NNT) is a common alternative way of presenting information on the effect of an intervention. The NNT is defined as the expected number of people who need to receive the experimental rather than the comparator intervention for one additional person to either incur or avoid an event (depending on the direction of the result) in a given time frame. Thus, for example, an NNT of 10 can be interpreted as ‘it is expected that one additional (or less) person will incur an event for every 10 participants receiving the experimental intervention rather than comparator over a given time frame’. It is important to be clear that:

• since the NNT is derived from the risk difference, it is still a comparative measure of effect (experimental versus a specific comparator) and not a general property of a single intervention; and
• the NNT gives an ‘expected value’. For example, NNT = 10 does not imply that one additional event will occur in each and every group of 10 people.

NNTs can be computed for both beneficial and detrimental events, and for interventions that cause both improvements and deteriorations in outcomes. In all instances NNTs are expressed as positive whole numbers. Some authors use the term ‘number needed to harm’ (NNH) when an intervention leads to an adverse outcome, or a decrease in a positive outcome, rather than improvement. However, this phrase can be misleading (most notably, it can easily be read to imply the number of people who will experience a harmful outcome if given the intervention), and it is strongly recommended that ‘number needed to harm’ and ‘NNH’ are avoided. The preferred alternative is to use phrases such as ‘number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome’ (NNTB) and ‘number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome’ (NNTH) to indicate direction of effect.

As NNTs refer to events, their interpretation needs to be worded carefully when the binary outcome is a dichotomization of a scale-based outcome. For example, if the outcome is pain measured on a ‘none, mild, moderate or severe’ scale it may have been dichotomized as ‘none or mild’ versus ‘moderate or severe’. It would be inappropriate for an NNT from these data to be referred to as an ‘NNT for pain’. It is an ‘NNT for moderate or severe pain’.

We consider different choices for presenting absolute effects in Section 15.4.3 . We then describe computations for obtaining these numbers from the results of individual studies and of meta-analyses in Section 15.4.4 .

15.4.3 Expressing risk differences

Users of reviews are liable to be influenced by the choice of statistical presentations of the evidence. Hoffrage and colleagues suggest that physicians’ inferences about statistical outcomes are more appropriate when they deal with ‘natural frequencies’ – whole numbers of people, both treated and untreated (e.g. treatment results in a drop from 20 out of 1000 to 10 out of 1000 women having breast cancer) – than when effects are presented as percentages (e.g. 1% absolute reduction in breast cancer risk) (Hoffrage et al 2000). Probabilities may be more difficult to understand than frequencies, particularly when events are rare. While standardization may be important in improving the presentation of research evidence (and participation in healthcare decisions), current evidence suggests that the presentation of natural frequencies for expressing differences in absolute risk is best understood by consumers of healthcare information (Akl et al 2011b). This evidence provides the rationale for presenting absolute risks in ‘Summary of findings’ tables as numbers of people with events per 1000 people receiving the intervention (see Chapter 14 ).

RRs and RRRs remain crucial because relative effects tend to be substantially more stable across risk groups than absolute effects (see Chapter 10, Section 10.4.3 ). Review authors can use their own data to study this consistency (Cates 1999, Smeeth et al 1999). Risk differences from studies are least likely to be consistent across baseline event rates; thus, they are rarely appropriate for computing numbers needed to treat in systematic reviews. If a relative effect measure (OR or RR) is chosen for meta-analysis, then a comparator group risk needs to be specified as part of the calculation of an RD or NNT. In addition, if there are several different groups of participants with different levels of risk, it is crucial to express absolute benefit for each clinically identifiable risk group, clarifying the time period to which this applies. Studies in patients with differing severity of disease, or studies with different lengths of follow-up will almost certainly have different comparator group risks. In these cases, different comparator group risks lead to different RDs and NNTs (except when the intervention has no effect). A recommended approach is to re-express an odds ratio or a risk ratio as a variety of RD or NNTs across a range of assumed comparator risks (ACRs) (McQuay and Moore 1997, Smeeth et al 1999). Review authors should bear these considerations in mind not only when constructing their ‘Summary of findings’ table, but also in the text of their review.

For example, a review of oral anticoagulants to prevent stroke presented information to users by describing absolute benefits for various baseline risks (Aguilar and Hart 2005, Aguilar et al 2007). They presented their principal findings as “The inherent risk of stroke should be considered in the decision to use oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients, selecting those who stand to benefit most for this therapy” (Aguilar and Hart 2005). Among high-risk atrial fibrillation patients with prior stroke or transient ischaemic attack who have stroke rates of about 12% (120 per 1000) per year, warfarin prevents about 70 strokes yearly per 1000 patients, whereas for low-risk atrial fibrillation patients (with a stroke rate of about 2% per year or 20 per 1000), warfarin prevents only 12 strokes. This presentation helps users to understand the important impact that typical baseline risks have on the absolute benefit that they can expect.

15.4.4 Computations

Direct computation of risk difference (RD) or a number needed to treat (NNT) depends on the summary statistic (odds ratio, risk ratio or risk differences) available from the study or meta-analysis. When expressing results of meta-analyses, review authors should use, in the computations, whatever statistic they determined to be the most appropriate summary for meta-analysis (see Chapter 10, Section 10.4.3 ). Here we present calculations to obtain RD as a reduction in the number of participants per 1000. For example, a risk difference of –0.133 corresponds to 133 fewer participants with the event per 1000.

RDs and NNTs should not be computed from the aggregated total numbers of participants and events across the trials. This approach ignores the randomization within studies, and may produce seriously misleading results if there is unbalanced randomization in any of the studies. Using the pooled result of a meta-analysis is more appropriate. When computing NNTs, the values obtained are by convention always rounded up to the next whole number.

15.4.4.1 Computing NNT from a risk difference (RD)

A NNT may be computed from a risk difference as

where the vertical bars (‘absolute value of’) in the denominator indicate that any minus sign should be ignored. It is convention to round the NNT up to the nearest whole number. For example, if the risk difference is –0.12 the NNT is 9; if the risk difference is –0.22 the NNT is 5. Cochrane Review authors should qualify the NNT as referring to benefit (improvement) or harm by denoting the NNT as NNTB or NNTH. Note that this approach, although feasible, should be used only for the results of a meta-analysis of risk differences. In most cases meta-analyses will be undertaken using a relative measure of effect (RR or OR), and those statistics should be used to calculate the NNT (see Section 15.4.4.2 and 15.4.4.3 ).

15.4.4.2 Computing risk differences or NNT from a risk ratio

To aid interpretation of the results of a meta-analysis of risk ratios, review authors may compute an absolute risk reduction or NNT. In order to do this, an assumed comparator risk (ACR) (otherwise known as a baseline risk, or risk that the outcome of interest would occur with the comparator intervention) is required. It will usually be appropriate to do this for a range of different ACRs. The computation proceeds as follows:

As an example, suppose the risk ratio is RR = 0.92, and an ACR = 0.3 (300 per 1000) is assumed. Then the effect on risk is 24 fewer per 1000:

The NNT is 42:

15.4.4.3 Computing risk differences or NNT from an odds ratio

Review authors may wish to compute a risk difference or NNT from the results of a meta-analysis of odds ratios. In order to do this, an ACR is required. It will usually be appropriate to do this for a range of different ACRs. The computation proceeds as follows:

As an example, suppose the odds ratio is OR = 0.73, and a comparator risk of ACR = 0.3 is assumed. Then the effect on risk is 62 fewer per 1000:

The NNT is 17:

15.4.4.4 Computing risk ratio from an odds ratio

Because risk ratios are easier to interpret than odds ratios, but odds ratios have favourable mathematical properties, a review author may decide to undertake a meta-analysis based on odds ratios, but to express the result as a summary risk ratio (or relative risk reduction). This requires an ACR. Then

It will often be reasonable to perform this transformation using the median comparator group risk from the studies in the meta-analysis.

15.4.4.5 Computing confidence limits

Confidence limits for RDs and NNTs may be calculated by applying the above formulae to the upper and lower confidence limits for the summary statistic (RD, RR or OR) (Altman 1998). Note that this confidence interval does not incorporate uncertainty around the ACR.

If the 95% confidence interval of OR or RR includes the value 1, one of the confidence limits will indicate benefit and the other harm. Thus, appropriate use of the words ‘fewer’ and ‘more’ is required for each limit when presenting results in terms of events. For NNTs, the two confidence limits should be labelled as NNTB and NNTH to indicate the direction of effect in each case. The confidence interval for the NNT will include a ‘discontinuity’, because increasingly smaller risk differences that approach zero will lead to NNTs approaching infinity. Thus, the confidence interval will include both an infinitely large NNTB and an infinitely large NNTH.

15.5 Interpreting results from continuous outcomes (including standardized mean differences)

15.5.1 meta-analyses with continuous outcomes.

Review authors should describe in the study protocol how they plan to interpret results for continuous outcomes. When outcomes are continuous, review authors have a number of options to present summary results. These options differ if studies report the same measure that is familiar to the target audiences, studies report the same or very similar measures that are less familiar to the target audiences, or studies report different measures.

15.5.2 Meta-analyses with continuous outcomes using the same measure

If all studies have used the same familiar units, for instance, results are expressed as durations of events, such as symptoms for conditions including diarrhoea, sore throat, otitis media, influenza or duration of hospitalization, a meta-analysis may generate a summary estimate in those units, as a difference in mean response (see, for instance, the row summarizing results for duration of diarrhoea in Chapter 14, Figure 14.1.b and the row summarizing oedema in Chapter 14, Figure 14.1.a ). For such outcomes, the ‘Summary of findings’ table should include a difference of means between the two interventions. However, when units of such outcomes may be difficult to interpret, particularly when they relate to rating scales (again, see the oedema row of Chapter 14, Figure 14.1.a ). ‘Summary of findings’ tables should include the minimum and maximum of the scale of measurement, and the direction. Knowledge of the smallest change in instrument score that patients perceive is important – the minimal important difference (MID) – and can greatly facilitate the interpretation of results (Guyatt et al 1998, Schünemann and Guyatt 2005). Knowing the MID allows review authors and users to place results in context. Review authors should state the MID – if known – in the Comments column of their ‘Summary of findings’ table. For example, the chronic respiratory questionnaire has possible scores in health-related quality of life ranging from 1 to 7 and 0.5 represents a well-established MID (Jaeschke et al 1989, Schünemann et al 2005).

15.5.3 Meta-analyses with continuous outcomes using different measures

When studies have used different instruments to measure the same construct, a standardized mean difference (SMD) may be used in meta-analysis for combining continuous data. Without guidance, clinicians and patients may have little idea how to interpret results presented as SMDs. Review authors should therefore consider issues of interpretability when planning their analysis at the protocol stage and should consider whether there will be suitable ways to re-express the SMD or whether alternative effect measures, such as a ratio of means, or possibly as minimal important difference units (Guyatt et al 2013b) should be used. Table 15.5.a and the following sections describe these options.

Table 15.5.a Approaches and their implications to presenting results of continuous variables when primary studies have used different instruments to measure the same construct. Adapted from Guyatt et al (2013b)

15.5.3.1 Presenting and interpreting SMDs using generic effect size estimates

The SMD expresses the intervention effect in standard units rather than the original units of measurement. The SMD is the difference in mean effects between the experimental and comparator groups divided by the pooled standard deviation of participants’ outcomes, or external SDs when studies are very small (see Chapter 6, Section 6.5.1.2 ). The value of a SMD thus depends on both the size of the effect (the difference between means) and the standard deviation of the outcomes (the inherent variability among participants or based on an external SD).

If review authors use the SMD, they might choose to present the results directly as SMDs (row 1a, Table 15.5.a and Table 15.5.b ). However, absolute values of the intervention and comparison groups are typically not useful because studies have used different measurement instruments with different units. Guiding rules for interpreting SMDs (or ‘Cohen’s effect sizes’) exist, and have arisen mainly from researchers in the social sciences (Cohen 1988). One example is as follows: 0.2 represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect and 0.8 a large effect (Cohen 1988). Variations exist (e.g. <0.40=small, 0.40 to 0.70=moderate, >0.70=large). Review authors might consider including such a guiding rule in interpreting the SMD in the text of the review, and in summary versions such as the Comments column of a ‘Summary of findings’ table. However, some methodologists believe that such interpretations are problematic because patient importance of a finding is context-dependent and not amenable to generic statements.

15.5.3.2 Re-expressing SMDs using a familiar instrument

The second possibility for interpreting the SMD is to express it in the units of one or more of the specific measurement instruments used by the included studies (row 1b, Table 15.5.a and Table 15.5.b ). The approach is to calculate an absolute difference in means by multiplying the SMD by an estimate of the SD associated with the most familiar instrument. To obtain this SD, a reasonable option is to calculate a weighted average across all intervention groups of all studies that used the selected instrument (preferably a pre-intervention or post-intervention SD as discussed in Chapter 10, Section 10.5.2 ). To better reflect among-person variation in practice, or to use an instrument not represented in the meta-analysis, it may be preferable to use a standard deviation from a representative observational study. The summary effect is thus re-expressed in the original units of that particular instrument and the clinical relevance and impact of the intervention effect can be interpreted using that familiar instrument.

The same approach of re-expressing the results for a familiar instrument can also be used for other standardized effect measures such as when standardizing by MIDs (Guyatt et al 2013b): see Section 15.5.3.5 .

Table 15.5.b Application of approaches when studies have used different measures: effects of dexamethasone for pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Karanicolas et al 2008). Reproduced with permission of Wolters Kluwer

1 Certainty rated according to GRADE from very low to high certainty. 2 Substantial unexplained heterogeneity in study results. 3 Imprecision due to wide confidence intervals. 4 The 20% comes from the proportion in the control group requiring rescue analgesia. 5 Crude (arithmetic) means of the post-operative pain mean responses across all five trials when transformed to a 100-point scale.

15.5.3.3 Re-expressing SMDs through dichotomization and transformation to relative and absolute measures

A third approach (row 1c, Table 15.5.a and Table 15.5.b ) relies on converting the continuous measure into a dichotomy and thus allows calculation of relative and absolute effects on a binary scale. A transformation of a SMD to a (log) odds ratio is available, based on the assumption that an underlying continuous variable has a logistic distribution with equal standard deviation in the two intervention groups, as discussed in Chapter 10, Section 10.6  (Furukawa 1999, Guyatt et al 2013b). The assumption is unlikely to hold exactly and the results must be regarded as an approximation. The log odds ratio is estimated as

(or approximately 1.81✕SMD). The resulting odds ratio can then be presented as normal, and in a ‘Summary of findings’ table, combined with an assumed comparator group risk to be expressed as an absolute risk difference. The comparator group risk in this case would refer to the proportion of people who have achieved a specific value of the continuous outcome. In randomized trials this can be interpreted as the proportion who have improved by some (specified) amount (responders), for instance by 5 points on a 0 to 100 scale. Table 15.5.c shows some illustrative results from this method. The risk differences can then be converted to NNTs or to people per thousand using methods described in Section 15.4.4 .

Table 15.5.c Risk difference derived for specific SMDs for various given ‘proportions improved’ in the comparator group (Furukawa 1999, Guyatt et al 2013b). Reproduced with permission of Elsevier 

15.5.3.4 Ratio of means

A more frequently used approach is based on calculation of a ratio of means between the intervention and comparator groups (Friedrich et al 2008) as discussed in Chapter 6, Section 6.5.1.3 . Interpretational advantages of this approach include the ability to pool studies with outcomes expressed in different units directly, to avoid the vulnerability of heterogeneous populations that limits approaches that rely on SD units, and for ease of clinical interpretation (row 2, Table 15.5.a and Table 15.5.b ). This method is currently designed for post-intervention scores only. However, it is possible to calculate a ratio of change scores if both intervention and comparator groups change in the same direction in each relevant study, and this ratio may sometimes be informative.

Limitations to this approach include its limited applicability to change scores (since it is unlikely that both intervention and comparator group changes are in the same direction in all studies) and the possibility of misleading results if the comparator group mean is very small, in which case even a modest difference from the intervention group will yield a large and therefore misleading ratio of means. It also requires that separate ratios of means be calculated for each included study, and then entered into a generic inverse variance meta-analysis (see Chapter 10, Section 10.3 ).

The ratio of means approach illustrated in Table 15.5.b suggests a relative reduction in pain of only 13%, meaning that those receiving steroids have a pain severity 87% of those in the comparator group, an effect that might be considered modest.

15.5.3.5 Presenting continuous results as minimally important difference units

To express results in MID units, review authors have two options. First, they can be combined across studies in the same way as the SMD, but instead of dividing the mean difference of each study by its SD, review authors divide by the MID associated with that outcome (Johnston et al 2010, Guyatt et al 2013b). Instead of SD units, the pooled results represent MID units (row 3, Table 15.5.a and Table 15.5.b ), and may be more easily interpretable. This approach avoids the problem of varying SDs across studies that may distort estimates of effect in approaches that rely on the SMD. The approach, however, relies on having well-established MIDs. The approach is also risky in that a difference less than the MID may be interpreted as trivial when a substantial proportion of patients may have achieved an important benefit.

The other approach makes a simple conversion (not shown in Table 15.5.b ), before undertaking the meta-analysis, of the means and SDs from each study to means and SDs on the scale of a particular familiar instrument whose MID is known. For example, one can rescale the mean and SD of other chronic respiratory disease instruments (e.g. rescaling a 0 to 100 score of an instrument) to a the 1 to 7 score in Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) units (by assuming 0 equals 1 and 100 equals 7 on the CRQ). Given the MID of the CRQ of 0.5, a mean difference in change of 0.71 after rescaling of all studies suggests a substantial effect of the intervention (Guyatt et al 2013b). This approach, presenting in units of the most familiar instrument, may be the most desirable when the target audiences have extensive experience with that instrument, particularly if the MID is well established.

15.6 Drawing conclusions

15.6.1 conclusions sections of a cochrane review.

Authors’ conclusions in a Cochrane Review are divided into implications for practice and implications for research. While Cochrane Reviews about interventions can provide meaningful information and guidance for practice, decisions about the desirable and undesirable consequences of healthcare options require evidence and judgements for criteria that most Cochrane Reviews do not provide (Alonso-Coello et al 2016). In describing the implications for practice and the development of recommendations, however, review authors may consider the certainty of the evidence, the balance of benefits and harms, and assumed values and preferences.

15.6.2 Implications for practice

Drawing conclusions about the practical usefulness of an intervention entails making trade-offs, either implicitly or explicitly, between the estimated benefits, harms and the values and preferences. Making such trade-offs, and thus making specific recommendations for an action in a specific context, goes beyond a Cochrane Review and requires additional evidence and informed judgements that most Cochrane Reviews do not provide (Alonso-Coello et al 2016). Such judgements are typically the domain of clinical practice guideline developers for which Cochrane Reviews will provide crucial information (Graham et al 2011, Schünemann et al 2014, Zhang et al 2018a). Thus, authors of Cochrane Reviews should not make recommendations.

If review authors feel compelled to lay out actions that clinicians and patients could take, they should – after describing the certainty of evidence and the balance of benefits and harms – highlight different actions that might be consistent with particular patterns of values and preferences. Other factors that might influence a decision should also be highlighted, including any known factors that would be expected to modify the effects of the intervention, the baseline risk or status of the patient, costs and who bears those costs, and the availability of resources. Review authors should ensure they consider all patient-important outcomes, including those for which limited data may be available. In the context of public health reviews the focus may be on population-important outcomes as the target may be an entire (non-diseased) population and include outcomes that are not measured in the population receiving an intervention (e.g. a reduction of transmission of infections from those receiving an intervention). This process implies a high level of explicitness in judgements about values or preferences attached to different outcomes and the certainty of the related evidence (Zhang et al 2018b, Zhang et al 2018c); this and a full cost-effectiveness analysis is beyond the scope of most Cochrane Reviews (although they might well be used for such analyses; see Chapter 20 ).

A review on the use of anticoagulation in cancer patients to increase survival (Akl et al 2011a) provides an example for laying out clinical implications for situations where there are important trade-offs between desirable and undesirable effects of the intervention: “The decision for a patient with cancer to start heparin therapy for survival benefit should balance the benefits and downsides and integrate the patient’s values and preferences. Patients with a high preference for a potential survival prolongation, limited aversion to potential bleeding, and who do not consider heparin (both UFH or LMWH) therapy a burden may opt to use heparin, while those with aversion to bleeding may not.”

15.6.3 Implications for research

The second category for authors’ conclusions in a Cochrane Review is implications for research. To help people make well-informed decisions about future healthcare research, the ‘Implications for research’ section should comment on the need for further research, and the nature of the further research that would be most desirable. It is helpful to consider the population, intervention, comparison and outcomes that could be addressed, or addressed more effectively in the future, in the context of the certainty of the evidence in the current review (Brown et al 2006):

• P (Population): diagnosis, disease stage, comorbidity, risk factor, sex, age, ethnic group, specific inclusion or exclusion criteria, clinical setting;
• I (Intervention): type, frequency, dose, duration, prognostic factor;
• C (Comparison): placebo, routine care, alternative treatment/management;
• O (Outcome): which clinical or patient-related outcomes will the researcher need to measure, improve, influence or accomplish? Which methods of measurement should be used?

While Cochrane Review authors will find the PICO domains helpful, the domains of the GRADE certainty framework further support understanding and describing what additional research will improve the certainty in the available evidence. Note that as the certainty of the evidence is likely to vary by outcome, these implications will be specific to certain outcomes in the review. Table 15.6.a shows how review authors may be aided in their interpretation of the body of evidence and drawing conclusions about future research and practice.

Table 15.6.a Implications for research and practice suggested by individual GRADE domains

The review of compression stockings for prevention of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in airline passengers described in Chapter 14 provides an example where there is some convincing evidence of a benefit of the intervention: “This review shows that the question of the effects on symptomless DVT of wearing versus not wearing compression stockings in the types of people studied in these trials should now be regarded as answered. Further research may be justified to investigate the relative effects of different strengths of stockings or of stockings compared to other preventative strategies. Further randomised trials to address the remaining uncertainty about the effects of wearing versus not wearing compression stockings on outcomes such as death, pulmonary embolism and symptomatic DVT would need to be large.” (Clarke et al 2016).

A review of therapeutic touch for anxiety disorder provides an example of the implications for research when no eligible studies had been found: “This review highlights the need for randomized controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic touch in reducing anxiety symptoms in people diagnosed with anxiety disorders. Future trials need to be rigorous in design and delivery, with subsequent reporting to include high quality descriptions of all aspects of methodology to enable appraisal and interpretation of results.” (Robinson et al 2007).

15.6.4 Reaching conclusions

A common mistake is to confuse ‘no evidence of an effect’ with ‘evidence of no effect’. When the confidence intervals are too wide (e.g. including no effect), it is wrong to claim that the experimental intervention has ‘no effect’ or is ‘no different’ from the comparator intervention. Review authors may also incorrectly ‘positively’ frame results for some effects but not others. For example, when the effect estimate is positive for a beneficial outcome but confidence intervals are wide, review authors may describe the effect as promising. However, when the effect estimate is negative for an outcome that is considered harmful but the confidence intervals include no effect, review authors report no effect. Another mistake is to frame the conclusion in wishful terms. For example, review authors might write, “there were too few people in the analysis to detect a reduction in mortality” when the included studies showed a reduction or even increase in mortality that was not ‘statistically significant’. One way of avoiding errors such as these is to consider the results blinded; that is, consider how the results would be presented and framed in the conclusions if the direction of the results was reversed. If the confidence interval for the estimate of the difference in the effects of the interventions overlaps with no effect, the analysis is compatible with both a true beneficial effect and a true harmful effect. If one of the possibilities is mentioned in the conclusion, the other possibility should be mentioned as well. Table 15.6.b suggests narrative statements for drawing conclusions based on the effect estimate from the meta-analysis and the certainty of the evidence.

Table 15.6.b Suggested narrative statements for phrasing conclusions

Another common mistake is to reach conclusions that go beyond the evidence. Often this is done implicitly, without referring to the additional information or judgements that are used in reaching conclusions about the implications of a review for practice. Even when additional information and explicit judgements support conclusions about the implications of a review for practice, review authors rarely conduct systematic reviews of the additional information. Furthermore, implications for practice are often dependent on specific circumstances and values that must be taken into consideration. As we have noted, review authors should always be cautious when drawing conclusions about implications for practice and they should not make recommendations.

15.7 Chapter information

Authors: Holger J Schünemann, Gunn E Vist, Julian PT Higgins, Nancy Santesso, Jonathan J Deeks, Paul Glasziou, Elie Akl, Gordon H Guyatt; on behalf of the Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group

Acknowledgements: Andrew Oxman, Jonathan Sterne, Michael Borenstein and Rob Scholten contributed text to earlier versions of this chapter.

Funding: This work was in part supported by funding from the Michael G DeGroote Cochrane Canada Centre and the Ontario Ministry of Health. JJD receives support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre at the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Birmingham. JPTH receives support from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

15.8 References

Aguilar MI, Hart R. Oral anticoagulants for preventing stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and no previous history of stroke or transient ischemic attacks. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005; 3 : CD001927.

Aguilar MI, Hart R, Pearce LA. Oral anticoagulants versus antiplatelet therapy for preventing stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and no history of stroke or transient ischemic attacks. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007; 3 : CD006186.

Akl EA, Gunukula S, Barba M, Yosuico VE, van Doormaal FF, Kuipers S, Middeldorp S, Dickinson HO, Bryant A, Schünemann H. Parenteral anticoagulation in patients with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011a; 1 : CD006652.

Akl EA, Oxman AD, Herrin J, Vist GE, Terrenato I, Sperati F, Costiniuk C, Blank D, Schünemann H. Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011b; 3 : CD006776.

Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ, Moberg J, Brignardello-Petersen R, Akl EA, Davoli M, Treweek S, Mustafa RA, Rada G, Rosenbaum S, Morelli A, Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Group GW. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction. BMJ 2016; 353 : i2016.

Altman DG. Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. BMJ 1998; 317 : 1309-1312.

Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O'Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schünemann HJ, Edejer TT, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW, Jr., Zaza S. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004; 328 : 1490.

Brown P, Brunnhuber K, Chalkidou K, Chalmers I, Clarke M, Fenton M, Forbes C, Glanville J, Hicks NJ, Moody J, Twaddle S, Timimi H, Young P. How to formulate research recommendations. BMJ 2006; 333 : 804-806.

Cates C. Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat: Pooling numbers needed to treat may not be reliable. BMJ 1999; 318 : 1764-1765.

Clarke MJ, Broderick C, Hopewell S, Juszczak E, Eisinga A. Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016; 9 : CD004002.

Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis in the Behavioral Sciences . 2nd edition ed. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.; 1988.

Coleman T, Chamberlain C, Davey MA, Cooper SE, Leonardi-Bee J. Pharmacological interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015; 12 : CD010078.

Dans AM, Dans L, Oxman AD, Robinson V, Acuin J, Tugwell P, Dennis R, Kang D. Assessing equity in clinical practice guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2007; 60 : 540-546.

Friedman LM, Furberg CD, DeMets DL. Fundamentals of Clinical Trials . 2nd edition ed. Littleton (MA): John Wright PSG, Inc.; 1985.

Friedrich JO, Adhikari NK, Beyene J. The ratio of means method as an alternative to mean differences for analyzing continuous outcome variables in meta-analysis: a simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2008; 8 : 32.

Furukawa T. From effect size into number needed to treat. Lancet 1999; 353 : 1680.

Graham R, Mancher M, Wolman DM, Greenfield S, Steinberg E. Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines, Board on Health Care Services: Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011.

Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, Norris S, Falck-Ytter Y, Glasziou P, DeBeer H, Jaeschke R, Rind D, Meerpohl J, Dahm P, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011a; 64 : 383-394.

Guyatt GH, Juniper EF, Walter SD, Griffith LE, Goldstein RS. Interpreting treatment effects in randomised trials. BMJ 1998; 316 : 690-693.

Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008; 336 : 924-926.

Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Woodcock J, Brozek J, Helfand M, Alonso-Coello P, Falck-Ytter Y, Jaeschke R, Vist G, Akl EA, Post PN, Norris S, Meerpohl J, Shukla VK, Nasser M, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence--indirectness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011b; 64 : 1303-1310.

Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Santesso N, Helfand M, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Norris S, Meerpohl J, Djulbegovic B, Alonso-Coello P, Post PN, Busse JW, Glasziou P, Christensen R, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing summary of findings tables-binary outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2013a; 66 : 158-172.

Guyatt GH, Thorlund K, Oxman AD, Walter SD, Patrick D, Furukawa TA, Johnston BC, Karanicolas P, Akl EA, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Kupper LL, Martin SL, Meerpohl JJ, Alonso-Coello P, Christensen R, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing summary of findings tables and evidence profiles-continuous outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2013b; 66 : 173-183.

Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T, Gold L. Methods for exploring implementation variation and local context within a cluster randomised community intervention trial. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2004; 58 : 788-793.

Hoffrage U, Lindsey S, Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G. Medicine. Communicating statistical information. Science 2000; 290 : 2261-2262.

Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials 1989; 10 : 407-415.

Johnston B, Thorlund K, Schünemann H, Xie F, Murad M, Montori V, Guyatt G. Improving the interpretation of health-related quality of life evidence in meta-analysis: The application of minimal important difference units. . Health Outcomes and Qualithy of Life 2010; 11 : 116.

Karanicolas PJ, Smith SE, Kanbur B, Davies E, Guyatt GH. The impact of prophylactic dexamethasone on nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Surgery 2008; 248 : 751-762.

Lumley J, Oliver SS, Chamberlain C, Oakley L. Interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004; 4 : CD001055.

McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Using numerical results from systematic reviews in clinical practice. Annals of Internal Medicine 1997; 126 : 712-720.

Resnicow K, Cross D, Wynder E. The Know Your Body program: a review of evaluation studies. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 1993; 70 : 188-207.

Robinson J, Biley FC, Dolk H. Therapeutic touch for anxiety disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007; 3 : CD006240.

Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: "to whom do the results of this trial apply?". Lancet 2005; 365 : 82-93.

Santesso N, Carrasco-Labra A, Langendam M, Brignardello-Petersen R, Mustafa RA, Heus P, Lasserson T, Opiyo N, Kunnamo I, Sinclair D, Garner P, Treweek S, Tovey D, Akl EA, Tugwell P, Brozek JL, Guyatt G, Schünemann HJ. Improving GRADE evidence tables part 3: detailed guidance for explanatory footnotes supports creating and understanding GRADE certainty in the evidence judgments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 74 : 28-39.

Schünemann HJ, Puhan M, Goldstein R, Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH. Measurement properties and interpretability of the Chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ). COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 2005; 2 : 81-89.

Schünemann HJ, Guyatt GH. Commentary--goodbye M(C)ID! Hello MID, where do you come from? Health Services Research 2005; 40 : 593-597.

Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 13. Applicability, transferability and adaptation. Health Research Policy and Systems 2006; 4 : 25.

Schünemann HJ. Methodological idiosyncracies, frameworks and challenges of non-pharmaceutical and non-technical treatment interventions. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2013; 107 : 214-220.

Schünemann HJ, Tugwell P, Reeves BC, Akl EA, Santesso N, Spencer FA, Shea B, Wells G, Helfand M. Non-randomized studies as a source of complementary, sequential or replacement evidence for randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions. Research Synthesis Methods 2013; 4 : 49-62.

Schünemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I, Falavigna M, Santesso N, Mustafa R, Ventresca M, Brignardello-Petersen R, Laisaar KT, Kowalski S, Baldeh T, Zhang Y, Raid U, Neumann I, Norris SL, Thornton J, Harbour R, Treweek S, Guyatt G, Alonso-Coello P, Reinap M, Brozek J, Oxman A, Akl EA. Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal 2014; 186 : E123-142.

Schünemann HJ. Interpreting GRADE's levels of certainty or quality of the evidence: GRADE for statisticians, considering review information size or less emphasis on imprecision? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 75 : 6-15.

Smeeth L, Haines A, Ebrahim S. Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analyses--sometimes informative, usually misleading. BMJ 1999; 318 : 1548-1551.

Sun X, Briel M, Busse JW, You JJ, Akl EA, Mejza F, Bala MM, Bassler D, Mertz D, Diaz-Granados N, Vandvik PO, Malaga G, Srinathan SK, Dahm P, Johnston BC, Alonso-Coello P, Hassouneh B, Walter SD, Heels-Ansdell D, Bhatnagar N, Altman DG, Guyatt GH. Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ 2012; 344 : e1553.

Zhang Y, Akl EA, Schünemann HJ. Using systematic reviews in guideline development: the GRADE approach. Research Synthesis Methods 2018a: doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1313.

Zhang Y, Alonso-Coello P, Guyatt GH, Yepes-Nunez JJ, Akl EA, Hazlewood G, Pardo-Hernandez H, Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta I, Qaseem A, Williams JW, Jr., Tugwell P, Flottorp S, Chang Y, Zhang Y, Mustafa RA, Rojas MX, Schünemann HJ. GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2018b: doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.1001.1013.

Zhang Y, Alonso Coello P, Guyatt G, Yepes-Nunez JJ, Akl EA, Hazlewood G, Pardo-Hernandez H, Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta I, Qaseem A, Williams JW, Jr., Tugwell P, Flottorp S, Chang Y, Zhang Y, Mustafa RA, Rojas MX, Xie F, Schünemann HJ. GRADE Guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences - Inconsistency, Imprecision, and other Domains. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2018c: doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.1005.1011.

For permission to re-use material from the Handbook (either academic or commercial), please see here for full details.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Indian J Anaesth
• v.60(9); 2016 Sep

Interpretation and display of research results

Dilip kumar kulkarni.

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

It important to properly collect, code, clean and edit the data before interpreting and displaying the research results. Computers play a major role in different phases of research starting from conceptual, design and planning, data collection, data analysis and research publication phases. The main objective of data display is to summarize the characteristics of a data and to make the data more comprehensible and meaningful. Usually data is presented depending upon the type of data in different tables and graphs. This will enable not only to understand the data behaviour, but also useful in choosing the different statistical tests to be applied.

INTRODUCTION

Collection of data and display of results is very important in any study. The data of an experimental study, observational study or a survey are required to be collected in properly designed format for documentation, taking into consideration the design of study and different end points of the study. Usually data are collected in the proforma of the study. The data recorded and documented should be stored carefully in documents and in electronic form for example, excel sheets or data bases.

The data are usually classified into qualitative and quantitative [ Table 1 ]. Qualitative data is further divided into two categories, unordered qualitative data, such as blood groups (A, B, O, AB); and ordered qualitative data, such as severity of pain (mild, moderate, severe). Quantitative data are numerical and fall into two categories: discrete quantitative data, such as the internal diameter of endotracheal tube; and continuous quantitative data, such as blood pressure.[ 1 ]

Examples of types of data and display of data

Data Coding is needed to allow the data recorded in categories to be used easily in statistical analysis with a computer. Coding assigns a unique number to each possible response. A few statistical packages analyse categorical data directly. If a number is assigned to categorical data, it becomes easier to analyse. This means that when the data are analysed and reported, the appropriate label needs to be assigned back to the numerical value to make it meaningful. The codes such as 1/0 for yes/no has the added advantage that the variable's 1/0 values can be easily analysed. The record of the codes modified is to be stored for later reference. Such coding can also be done for categorical ordinal data to convert in to numerical ordinal data, for example the severity of pain mild, moderate and severe into 1, 2 and 3 respectively.

PROCESS OF DATA CHECKING, CLEANING AND EDITING

In clinical research, errors occur despite designing the study properly, entering data carefully and preventing errors. Data cleaning and editing are carried out to identify and correct these errors, so that the study results will be accurate.[ 2 ]

Data entry errors in case of sex, dates, double entries and unexpected results are to be corrected unquestionably. Data editing can be done in three phases namely screening, diagnosing and editing [ Figure 1 ].

Process of data checking, cleaning and editing in three phases

Screening phase

During screening of data, it is possible to distinguish the odd data, excess of data, double entries, outliers, and unexpected results. Screening methods are checking of questionnaires, data validation, browsing the excel sheets, data tables and graphical methods to observe data distribution.

Diagnostic phase

The nature of the data can be assessed in this phase. The data entries can be true normal, true errors, outliers, unexpected results.

Treatment phase

Once the data nature is identified the editing can be done by correcting, deleting or leaving the data sets unchanged.

The abnormal data points usually have to be corrected or to be deleted.[ 2 ] However some authors advocate these data points to be included in analysis.[ 3 ] If these extreme data points are deleted, they should be reported as “excluded from analysis”.[ 4 ]

ROLE OF COMPUTERS IN RESEARCH

The role of computers in scientific research is very high; the computers have the ability to perform the analytic tasks with high speed, accuracy and consistency. The Computers role in research process can be explained in different phases.[ 5 ]

Role of computer in conceptual phase

The conceptual phase consists of formulation of research problem, literature survey, theoretical frame work and developing the hypothesis. Computers are useful in searching the literatures. The references can be stored in the electronic database.

Role of computers in design and planning phase

This phase consists of research design preparation and determining sample design, population size, research variables, sampling plan, reviewing research plan and pilot study. The role of computers in these process is almost indispensable.

Role of computers in data collection phase

The data obtained from the subjects stored in computers are word files or excel spread sheets or statistical software data files or from data centers of hospital information management systems (data warehouse). If the data are stored in electronic format checking the data becomes easier. Thus, computers help in data entry, data editing, and data management including follow up actions. Examples of editors are Word Pad, SPSS data editor, word processors.

Role of computers in data analysis

This phase mainly consist of statistical analysis of the data and interpretation of results. Software like Minitab (Minitab Inc. USA.), SPSS (IBM Crop. New York), NCSS (LLC. Kaysville, Utah, USA) and spreadsheets are widely used.

Role of computer in research publication

Research article, research paper, research thesis or research dissertation is typed in word processing software in computers and stored. Which can be easily published in different electronic formats.[ 5 ]

DATA DISPLAY AND DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH DATA

Data display and description is an important part of any research project which helps in knowing the distribution of data, detecting errors, missing values and outliers. Ultimately the data should be more comprehensible and meaningful.

Tables are commonly used for describing both qualitative and quantitative data. The graphs are useful for visualising the data and understanding the variations and trends of the data. Qualitative data are usually described by using bar or pie charts. Histograms, polygons or box plots are used to represent quantitative data.[ 1 ]

Qualitative data

Tabulation of qualitative data.

The qualitative observations are categorised in to different categories. The category frequency is nothing but the number of observations with in that category. The category relative frequency can be calculated by dividing the number of observations in the category by total number of observations. The Percentage for a category is more commonly used to describe qualitative data. It can be computed by multiplying relative frequency with hundred.[ 6 , 7 ]

The classification of 30 Patients of a group by severity of postoperative pain presented in Table 2 . The frequency table for this data computed by using the software NCSS[ 8 ] is shown in Table 3 .

The classification of post-operative pain in patients

The frequency table for the variable pain

Graphical display of qualitative data

The qualitative data are commonly displayed by bar graphs and pie charts.[ 9 ]

Bar graphs displays information of the frequency, relative frequency or percentage of each category on vertical axis or horizontal axis of the graph. [ Figure 2 ] Pie charts depicts the same information in divided slices in a complete circle. The area for the circle is equal to the frequency, relative frequency or percentage of that category [ Figure 3 ].

The bar graph generated by computer using NCSS software for the variable pain

The Pie graph generated by computer using NCSS software for the variable pain

Quantitative data

Tabulation of quantitative data.

The quantitative data are usually presented as frequency distribution or relative frequency rather than percentage. The data are divided into different classes. The upper and lower limits or the width of classes will depend up on the size of the data and can easily be adjusted.

The frequency distribution and relative frequency distribution table can be constructed in the following manner:

• The quantitative data are divided into number of classes. The lower limit and upper limit of the classes have to be defined.
• The range or width of the class intervals can be calculated by dividing the difference in the upper limit and lower limit by total number of classes.
• The class frequency is the number of observations that fall in that class.
• The relative class frequency can be calculated by dividing class frequency by total number of observations.

Example of frequency table for the data of Systolic blood pressure of 60 patients undergoing craniotomy is shown in Table 4 . The number of classes were 20, the lower limit and the upper limit were 86 mm of Hg and 186 mm of Hg respectively.

Frequency tabulation of systolic blood pressure in sixty patients (unit is mm Hg)

Graphical description of quantitative data

The frequency distribution is usually depicted in histograms. The count or frequency is plotted along the vertical axis and the horizontal axis represents data values. The normality of distribution can be assessed visually by histograms. A frequency histogram is constructed for the dataset of systolic blood pressure, from the frequency Table 4 [ Figure 4 ].

The frequency histogram for the data set of systolic blood pressure (BP), for which the frequency table is constructed in Table 4

Box plot gives the information of spread of observations in a single group around a centre value. The distribution pattern and extreme values can be easily viewed by box plot. A boxplot is constructed for the dataset of systolic blood pressure, from the frequency Table 4 [ Figure 5 ].

Box plot is constructed from data of Table 4

Polygon construction is similar to histogram. However it is a line graph connecting the data points at mid points of class intervals. The polygon is simpler and outline the data pattern clearly[ 8 ] [ Figure 6 ].

A frequency polygon constructed from data of Table 4 in NCSS software

It is often necessary to further summarise quantitative data, for example, for hypothesis testing. The most important elements of a data are its location, which is measured by mean, median and mode. The other parameters are variability (range, interquartile range, standard deviation and variance) and shape of the distribution (normal, skewness, and kurtosis). The details of which will be discussed in the next chapter.

The proper designing of research methodology is an important step from the conceptual phase to the conclusion phase and the computers play an invaluable role from the beginning to the end of a study. The data collection, data storage and data management are vital for any study. The data display and interpretation will help in understating the behaviour of the data and also to know the assumptions for statistical analysis.

• AI & NLP
• Churn & Loyalty
• Customer Experience
• Customer Journeys
• Customer Metrics
• Feedback Analysis
• Product Experience
• Product Updates
• Sentiment Analysis
• Surveys & Feedback Collection
• Try Thematic

Welcome to the community

Qualitative Data Analysis: Step-by-Step Guide (Manual vs. Automatic)

When we conduct qualitative methods of research, need to explain changes in metrics or understand people's opinions, we always turn to qualitative data. Qualitative data is typically generated through:

• Interview transcripts
• Surveys with open-ended questions
• Contact center transcripts
• Texts and documents
• Audio and video recordings
• Observational notes

Compared to quantitative data, which captures structured information, qualitative data is unstructured and has more depth. It can answer our questions, can help formulate hypotheses and build understanding.

It's important to understand the differences between quantitative data & qualitative data . But unfortunately, analyzing qualitative data is difficult. While tools like Excel, Tableau and PowerBI crunch and visualize quantitative data with ease, there are a limited number of mainstream tools for analyzing qualitative data . The majority of qualitative data analysis still happens manually.

That said, there are two new trends that are changing this. First, there are advances in natural language processing (NLP) which is focused on understanding human language. Second, there is an explosion of user-friendly software designed for both researchers and businesses. Both help automate the qualitative data analysis process.

In this post we want to teach you how to conduct a successful qualitative data analysis. There are two primary qualitative data analysis methods; manual & automatic. We will teach you how to conduct the analysis manually, and also, automatically using software solutions powered by NLP. We’ll guide you through the steps to conduct a manual analysis, and look at what is involved and the role technology can play in automating this process.

More businesses are switching to fully-automated analysis of qualitative customer data because it is cheaper, faster, and just as accurate. Primarily, businesses purchase subscriptions to feedback analytics platforms so that they can understand customer pain points and sentiment.

We’ll take you through 5 steps to conduct a successful qualitative data analysis. Within each step we will highlight the key difference between the manual, and automated approach of qualitative researchers. Here's an overview of the steps:

The 5 steps to doing qualitative data analysis

• Gathering and collecting your qualitative data
• Organizing and connecting into your qualitative data
• Coding your qualitative data
• Analyzing the qualitative data for insights
• Reporting on the insights derived from your analysis

What is Qualitative Data Analysis?

Qualitative data analysis is a process of gathering, structuring and interpreting qualitative data to understand what it represents.

Qualitative data is non-numerical and unstructured. Qualitative data generally refers to text, such as open-ended responses to survey questions or user interviews, but also includes audio, photos and video.

Businesses often perform qualitative data analysis on customer feedback. And within this context, qualitative data generally refers to verbatim text data collected from sources such as reviews, complaints, chat messages, support centre interactions, customer interviews, case notes or social media comments.

How is qualitative data analysis different from quantitative data analysis?

Understanding the differences between quantitative & qualitative data is important. When it comes to analyzing data, Qualitative Data Analysis serves a very different role to Quantitative Data Analysis. But what sets them apart?

Qualitative Data Analysis dives into the stories hidden in non-numerical data such as interviews, open-ended survey answers, or notes from observations. It uncovers the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ giving a deep understanding of people’s experiences and emotions.

Quantitative Data Analysis on the other hand deals with numerical data, using statistics to measure differences, identify preferred options, and pinpoint root causes of issues.  It steps back to address questions like "how many" or "what percentage" to offer broad insights we can apply to larger groups.

In short, Qualitative Data Analysis is like a microscope,  helping us understand specific detail. Quantitative Data Analysis is like the telescope, giving us a broader perspective. Both are important, working together to decode data for different objectives.

Qualitative Data Analysis methods

Once all the data has been captured, there are a variety of analysis techniques available and the choice is determined by your specific research objectives and the kind of data you’ve gathered.  Common qualitative data analysis methods include:

Content Analysis

This is a popular approach to qualitative data analysis. Other qualitative analysis techniques may fit within the broad scope of content analysis. Thematic analysis is a part of the content analysis.  Content analysis is used to identify the patterns that emerge from text, by grouping content into words, concepts, and themes. Content analysis is useful to quantify the relationship between all of the grouped content. The Columbia School of Public Health has a detailed breakdown of content analysis .

Narrative Analysis

Narrative analysis focuses on the stories people tell and the language they use to make sense of them.  It is particularly useful in qualitative research methods where customer stories are used to get a deep understanding of customers’ perspectives on a specific issue. A narrative analysis might enable us to summarize the outcomes of a focused case study.

Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is used to get a thorough understanding of the political, cultural and power dynamics that exist in specific situations.  The focus of discourse analysis here is on the way people express themselves in different social contexts. Discourse analysis is commonly used by brand strategists who hope to understand why a group of people feel the way they do about a brand or product.

Thematic Analysis

Thematic analysis is used to deduce the meaning behind the words people use. This is accomplished by discovering repeating themes in text. These meaningful themes reveal key insights into data and can be quantified, particularly when paired with sentiment analysis . Often, the outcome of thematic analysis is a code frame that captures themes in terms of codes, also called categories. So the process of thematic analysis is also referred to as “coding”. A common use-case for thematic analysis in companies is analysis of customer feedback.

Grounded Theory

Grounded theory is a useful approach when little is known about a subject. Grounded theory starts by formulating a theory around a single data case. This means that the theory is “grounded”. Grounded theory analysis is based on actual data, and not entirely speculative. Then additional cases can be examined to see if they are relevant and can add to the original grounded theory.

Challenges of Qualitative Data Analysis

While Qualitative Data Analysis offers rich insights, it comes with its challenges. Each unique QDA method has its unique hurdles. Let’s take a look at the challenges researchers and analysts might face, depending on the chosen method.

• Time and Effort (Narrative Analysis): Narrative analysis, which focuses on personal stories, demands patience. Sifting through lengthy narratives to find meaningful insights can be time-consuming, requires dedicated effort.
• Being Objective (Grounded Theory): Grounded theory, building theories from data, faces the challenges of personal biases. Staying objective while interpreting data is crucial, ensuring conclusions are rooted in the data itself.
• Complexity (Thematic Analysis): Thematic analysis involves identifying themes within data, a process that can be intricate. Categorizing and understanding themes can be complex, especially when each piece of data varies in context and structure. Thematic Analysis software can simplify this process.
• Generalizing Findings (Narrative Analysis): Narrative analysis, dealing with individual stories, makes drawing broad challenging. Extending findings from a single narrative to a broader context requires careful consideration.
• Managing Data (Thematic Analysis): Thematic analysis involves organizing and managing vast amounts of unstructured data, like interview transcripts. Managing this can be a hefty task, requiring effective data management strategies.
• Skill Level (Grounded Theory): Grounded theory demands specific skills to build theories from the ground up. Finding or training analysts with these skills poses a challenge, requiring investment in building expertise.

Benefits of qualitative data analysis

Qualitative Data Analysis (QDA) is like a versatile toolkit, offering a tailored approach to understanding your data. The benefits it offers are as diverse as the methods. Let’s explore why choosing the right method matters.

• Tailored Methods for Specific Needs: QDA isn't one-size-fits-all. Depending on your research objectives and the type of data at hand, different methods offer unique benefits. If you want emotive customer stories, narrative analysis paints a strong picture. When you want to explain a score, thematic analysis reveals insightful patterns
• Flexibility with Thematic Analysis: thematic analysis is like a chameleon in the toolkit of QDA. It adapts well to different types of data and research objectives, making it a top choice for any qualitative analysis.
• Deeper Understanding, Better Products: QDA helps you dive into people's thoughts and feelings. This deep understanding helps you build products and services that truly matches what people want, ensuring satisfied customers
• Finding the Unexpected: Qualitative data often reveals surprises that we miss in quantitative data. QDA offers us new ideas and perspectives, for insights we might otherwise miss.
• Building Effective Strategies: Insights from QDA are like strategic guides. They help businesses in crafting plans that match people’s desires.
• Creating Genuine Connections: Understanding people’s experiences lets businesses connect on a real level. This genuine connection helps build trust and loyalty, priceless for any business.

How to do Qualitative Data Analysis: 5 steps

Now we are going to show how you can do your own qualitative data analysis. We will guide you through this process step by step. As mentioned earlier, you will learn how to do qualitative data analysis manually , and also automatically using modern qualitative data and thematic analysis software.

To get best value from the analysis process and research process, it’s important to be super clear about the nature and scope of the question that’s being researched. This will help you select the research collection channels that are most likely to help you answer your question.

Depending on if you are a business looking to understand customer sentiment, or an academic surveying a school, your approach to qualitative data analysis will be unique.

Once you’re clear, there’s a sequence to follow. And, though there are differences in the manual and automatic approaches, the process steps are mostly the same.

The use case for our step-by-step guide is a company looking to collect data (customer feedback data), and analyze the customer feedback - in order to improve customer experience. By analyzing the customer feedback the company derives insights about their business and their customers. You can follow these same steps regardless of the nature of your research. Let’s get started.

Step 1: Gather your qualitative data and conduct research (Conduct qualitative research)

The first step of qualitative research is to do data collection. Put simply, data collection is gathering all of your data for analysis. A common situation is when qualitative data is spread across various sources.

Classic methods of gathering qualitative data

Most companies use traditional methods for gathering qualitative data: conducting interviews with research participants, running surveys, and running focus groups. This data is typically stored in documents, CRMs, databases and knowledge bases. It’s important to examine which data is available and needs to be included in your research project, based on its scope.

Using your existing qualitative feedback

As it becomes easier for customers to engage across a range of different channels, companies are gathering increasingly large amounts of both solicited and unsolicited qualitative feedback.

Most organizations have now invested in Voice of Customer programs , support ticketing systems, chatbot and support conversations, emails and even customer Slack chats.

These new channels provide companies with new ways of getting feedback, and also allow the collection of unstructured feedback data at scale.

The great thing about this data is that it contains a wealth of valubale insights and that it’s already there! When you have a new question about user behavior or your customers, you don’t need to create a new research study or set up a focus group. You can find most answers in the data you already have.

Typically, this data is stored in third-party solutions or a central database, but there are ways to export it or connect to a feedback analysis solution through integrations or an API.

Utilize untapped qualitative data channels

There are many online qualitative data sources you may not have considered. For example, you can find useful qualitative data in social media channels like Twitter or Facebook. Online forums, review sites, and online communities such as Discourse or Reddit also contain valuable data about your customers, or research questions.

If you are considering performing a qualitative benchmark analysis against competitors - the internet is your best friend. Gathering feedback in competitor reviews on sites like Trustpilot, G2, Capterra, Better Business Bureau or on app stores is a great way to perform a competitor benchmark analysis.

Customer feedback analysis software often has integrations into social media and review sites, or you could use a solution like DataMiner to scrape the reviews.

Step 2: Connect & organize all your qualitative data

Now you all have this qualitative data but there’s a problem, the data is unstructured. Before feedback can be analyzed and assigned any value, it needs to be organized in a single place. Why is this important? Consistency!

If all data is easily accessible in one place and analyzed in a consistent manner, you will have an easier time summarizing and making decisions based on this data.

The manual approach to organizing your data

The classic method of structuring qualitative data is to plot all the raw data you’ve gathered into a spreadsheet.

Typically, research and support teams would share large Excel sheets and different business units would make sense of the qualitative feedback data on their own. Each team collects and organizes the data in a way that best suits them, which means the feedback tends to be kept in separate silos.

An alternative and a more robust solution is to store feedback in a central database, like Snowflake or Amazon Redshift .

Keep in mind that when you organize your data in this way, you are often preparing it to be imported into another software. If you go the route of a database, you would need to use an API to push the feedback into a third-party software.

Computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS)

Traditionally within the manual analysis approach (but not always), qualitative data is imported into CAQDAS software for coding.

In the early 2000s, CAQDAS software was popularised by developers such as ATLAS.ti, NVivo and MAXQDA and eagerly adopted by researchers to assist with the organizing and coding of data.  

The benefits of using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software:

• Assists in the organizing of your data
• Opens you up to exploring different interpretations of your data analysis
• Allows you to share your dataset easier and allows group collaboration (allows for secondary analysis)

However you still need to code the data, uncover the themes and do the analysis yourself. Therefore it is still a manual approach.

Organizing your qualitative data in a feedback repository

Another solution to organizing your qualitative data is to upload it into a feedback repository where it can be unified with your other data , and easily searchable and taggable. There are a number of software solutions that act as a central repository for your qualitative research data. Here are a couple solutions that you could investigate:  

• Dovetail: Dovetail is a research repository with a focus on video and audio transcriptions. You can tag your transcriptions within the platform for theme analysis. You can also upload your other qualitative data such as research reports, survey responses, support conversations, and customer interviews. Dovetail acts as a single, searchable repository. And makes it easier to collaborate with other people around your qualitative research.
• EnjoyHQ: EnjoyHQ is another research repository with similar functionality to Dovetail. It boasts a more sophisticated search engine, but it has a higher starting subscription cost.

Organizing your qualitative data in a feedback analytics platform

If you have a lot of qualitative customer or employee feedback, from the likes of customer surveys or employee surveys, you will benefit from a feedback analytics platform. A feedback analytics platform is a software that automates the process of both sentiment analysis and thematic analysis . Companies use the integrations offered by these platforms to directly tap into their qualitative data sources (review sites, social media, survey responses, etc.). The data collected is then organized and analyzed consistently within the platform.

If you have data prepared in a spreadsheet, it can also be imported into feedback analytics platforms.

Once all this rich data has been organized within the feedback analytics platform, it is ready to be coded and themed, within the same platform. Thematic is a feedback analytics platform that offers one of the largest libraries of integrations with qualitative data sources.

Step 3: Coding your qualitative data

Your feedback data is now organized in one place. Either within your spreadsheet, CAQDAS, feedback repository or within your feedback analytics platform. The next step is to code your feedback data so we can extract meaningful insights in the next step.

Coding is the process of labelling and organizing your data in such a way that you can then identify themes in the data, and the relationships between these themes.

To simplify the coding process, you will take small samples of your customer feedback data, come up with a set of codes, or categories capturing themes, and label each piece of feedback, systematically, for patterns and meaning. Then you will take a larger sample of data, revising and refining the codes for greater accuracy and consistency as you go.

If you choose to use a feedback analytics platform, much of this process will be automated and accomplished for you.

The terms to describe different categories of meaning (‘theme’, ‘code’, ‘tag’, ‘category’ etc) can be confusing as they are often used interchangeably.  For clarity, this article will use the term ‘code’.

To code means to identify key words or phrases and assign them to a category of meaning. “I really hate the customer service of this computer software company” would be coded as “poor customer service”.

How to manually code your qualitative data

• Decide whether you will use deductive or inductive coding. Deductive coding is when you create a list of predefined codes, and then assign them to the qualitative data. Inductive coding is the opposite of this, you create codes based on the data itself. Codes arise directly from the data and you label them as you go. You need to weigh up the pros and cons of each coding method and select the most appropriate.
• Read through the feedback data to get a broad sense of what it reveals. Now it’s time to start assigning your first set of codes to statements and sections of text.
• Keep repeating step 2, adding new codes and revising the code description as often as necessary.  Once it has all been coded, go through everything again, to be sure there are no inconsistencies and that nothing has been overlooked.
• Create a code frame to group your codes. The coding frame is the organizational structure of all your codes. And there are two commonly used types of coding frames, flat, or hierarchical. A hierarchical code frame will make it easier for you to derive insights from your analysis.
• Based on the number of times a particular code occurs, you can now see the common themes in your feedback data. This is insightful! If ‘bad customer service’ is a common code, it’s time to take action.

We have a detailed guide dedicated to manually coding your qualitative data .

Using software to speed up manual coding of qualitative data

An Excel spreadsheet is still a popular method for coding. But various software solutions can help speed up this process. Here are some examples.

• CAQDAS / NVivo - CAQDAS software has built-in functionality that allows you to code text within their software. You may find the interface the software offers easier for managing codes than a spreadsheet.
• Dovetail/EnjoyHQ - You can tag transcripts and other textual data within these solutions. As they are also repositories you may find it simpler to keep the coding in one platform.
• IBM SPSS - SPSS is a statistical analysis software that may make coding easier than in a spreadsheet.
• Ascribe - Ascribe’s ‘Coder’ is a coding management system. Its user interface will make it easier for you to manage your codes.

Automating the qualitative coding process using thematic analysis software

In solutions which speed up the manual coding process, you still have to come up with valid codes and often apply codes manually to pieces of feedback. But there are also solutions that automate both the discovery and the application of codes.

Advances in machine learning have now made it possible to read, code and structure qualitative data automatically. This type of automated coding is offered by thematic analysis software .

Automation makes it far simpler and faster to code the feedback and group it into themes. By incorporating natural language processing (NLP) into the software, the AI looks across sentences and phrases to identify common themes meaningful statements. Some automated solutions detect repeating patterns and assign codes to them, others make you train the AI by providing examples. You could say that the AI learns the meaning of the feedback on its own.

Thematic automates the coding of qualitative feedback regardless of source. There’s no need to set up themes or categories in advance. Simply upload your data and wait a few minutes. You can also manually edit the codes to further refine their accuracy.  Experiments conducted indicate that Thematic’s automated coding is just as accurate as manual coding .

Paired with sentiment analysis and advanced text analytics - these automated solutions become powerful for deriving quality business or research insights.

You could also build your own , if you have the resources!

The key benefits of using an automated coding solution

Automated analysis can often be set up fast and there’s the potential to uncover things that would never have been revealed if you had given the software a prescribed list of themes to look for.

Because the model applies a consistent rule to the data, it captures phrases or statements that a human eye might have missed.

Complete and consistent analysis of customer feedback enables more meaningful findings. Leading us into step 4.

Step 4: Analyze your data: Find meaningful insights

Now we are going to analyze our data to find insights. This is where we start to answer our research questions. Keep in mind that step 4 and step 5 (tell the story) have some overlap . This is because creating visualizations is both part of analysis process and reporting.

The task of uncovering insights is to scour through the codes that emerge from the data and draw meaningful correlations from them. It is also about making sure each insight is distinct and has enough data to support it.

Part of the analysis is to establish how much each code relates to different demographics and customer profiles, and identify whether there’s any relationship between these data points.

Manually create sub-codes to improve the quality of insights

If your code frame only has one level, you may find that your codes are too broad to be able to extract meaningful insights. This is where it is valuable to create sub-codes to your primary codes. This process is sometimes referred to as meta coding.

Note: If you take an inductive coding approach, you can create sub-codes as you are reading through your feedback data and coding it.

While time-consuming, this exercise will improve the quality of your analysis. Here is an example of what sub-codes could look like.

You need to carefully read your qualitative data to create quality sub-codes. But as you can see, the depth of analysis is greatly improved. By calculating the frequency of these sub-codes you can get insight into which  customer service problems you can immediately address.

Correlate the frequency of codes to customer segments

Many businesses use customer segmentation . And you may have your own respondent segments that you can apply to your qualitative analysis. Segmentation is the practise of dividing customers or research respondents into subgroups.

Segments can be based on:

• Demographic
• And any other data type that you care to segment by

It is particularly useful to see the occurrence of codes within your segments. If one of your customer segments is considered unimportant to your business, but they are the cause of nearly all customer service complaints, it may be in your best interest to focus attention elsewhere. This is a useful insight!

Manually visualizing coded qualitative data

There are formulas you can use to visualize key insights in your data. The formulas we will suggest are imperative if you are measuring a score alongside your feedback.

If you are collecting a metric alongside your qualitative data this is a key visualization. Impact answers the question: “What’s the impact of a code on my overall score?”. Using Net Promoter Score (NPS) as an example, first you need to:

• Calculate overall NPS
• Calculate NPS in the subset of responses that do not contain that theme
• Subtract B from A

Then you can use this simple formula to calculate code impact on NPS .

You can then visualize this data using a bar chart.

You can download our CX toolkit - it includes a template to recreate this.

Trends over time

This analysis can help you answer questions like: “Which codes are linked to decreases or increases in my score over time?”

We need to compare two sequences of numbers: NPS over time and code frequency over time . Using Excel, calculate the correlation between the two sequences, which can be either positive (the more codes the higher the NPS, see picture below), or negative (the more codes the lower the NPS).

Now you need to plot code frequency against the absolute value of code correlation with NPS. Here is the formula:

The visualization could look like this:

These are two examples, but there are more. For a third manual formula, and to learn why word clouds are not an insightful form of analysis, read our visualizations article .

Using a text analytics solution to automate analysis

Automated text analytics solutions enable codes and sub-codes to be pulled out of the data automatically. This makes it far faster and easier to identify what’s driving negative or positive results. And to pick up emerging trends and find all manner of rich insights in the data.

Another benefit of AI-driven text analytics software is its built-in capability for sentiment analysis, which provides the emotive context behind your feedback and other qualitative textual data therein.

Thematic provides text analytics that goes further by allowing users to apply their expertise on business context to edit or augment the AI-generated outputs.

Since the move away from manual research is generally about reducing the human element, adding human input to the technology might sound counter-intuitive. However, this is mostly to make sure important business nuances in the feedback aren’t missed during coding. The result is a higher accuracy of analysis. This is sometimes referred to as augmented intelligence .

Step 5: Report on your data: Tell the story

The last step of analyzing your qualitative data is to report on it, to tell the story. At this point, the codes are fully developed and the focus is on communicating the narrative to the audience.

A coherent outline of the qualitative research, the findings and the insights is vital for stakeholders to discuss and debate before they can devise a meaningful course of action.

Creating graphs and reporting in Powerpoint

Typically, qualitative researchers take the tried and tested approach of distilling their report into a series of charts, tables and other visuals which are woven into a narrative for presentation in Powerpoint.

Using visualization software for reporting

With data transformation and APIs, the analyzed data can be shared with data visualisation software, such as Power BI or Tableau , Google Studio or Looker. Power BI and Tableau are among the most preferred options.

Visualizing your insights inside a feedback analytics platform

Feedback analytics platforms, like Thematic, incorporate visualisation tools that intuitively turn key data and insights into graphs.  This removes the time consuming work of constructing charts to visually identify patterns and creates more time to focus on building a compelling narrative that highlights the insights, in bite-size chunks, for executive teams to review.

Using a feedback analytics platform with visualization tools means you don’t have to use a separate product for visualizations. You can export graphs into Powerpoints straight from the platforms.

Conclusion - Manual or Automated?

There are those who remain deeply invested in the manual approach - because it’s familiar, because they’re reluctant to spend money and time learning new software, or because they’ve been burned by the overpromises of AI.  

For projects that involve small datasets, manual analysis makes sense. For example, if the objective is simply to quantify a simple question like “Do customers prefer X concepts to Y?”. If the findings are being extracted from a small set of focus groups and interviews, sometimes it’s easier to just read them

However, as new generations come into the workplace, it’s technology-driven solutions that feel more comfortable and practical. And the merits are undeniable.  Especially if the objective is to go deeper and understand the ‘why’ behind customers’ preference for X or Y. And even more especially if time and money are considerations.

The ability to collect a free flow of qualitative feedback data at the same time as the metric means AI can cost-effectively scan, crunch, score and analyze a ton of feedback from one system in one go. And time-intensive processes like focus groups, or coding, that used to take weeks, can now be completed in a matter of hours or days.

But aside from the ever-present business case to speed things up and keep costs down, there are also powerful research imperatives for automated analysis of qualitative data: namely, accuracy and consistency.

Finding insights hidden in feedback requires consistency, especially in coding.  Not to mention catching all the ‘unknown unknowns’ that can skew research findings and steering clear of cognitive bias.

Some say without manual data analysis researchers won’t get an accurate “feel” for the insights. However, the larger data sets are, the harder it is to sort through the feedback and organize feedback that has been pulled from different places.  And, the more difficult it is to stay on course, the greater the risk of drawing incorrect, or incomplete, conclusions grows.

Though the process steps for qualitative data analysis have remained pretty much unchanged since psychologist Paul Felix Lazarsfeld paved the path a hundred years ago, the impact digital technology has had on types of qualitative feedback data and the approach to the analysis are profound.  

If you want to try an automated feedback analysis solution on your own qualitative data, you can get started with Thematic .

Community & Marketing

Tyler manages our community of CX, insights & analytics professionals. Tyler's goal is to help unite insights professionals around common challenges.

We make it easy to discover the customer and product issues that matter.

Unlock the value of feedback at scale, in one platform. Try it for free now!

• Questions to ask your Feedback Analytics vendor
• How to end customer churn for good
• Scalable analysis of NPS verbatims
• 5 Text analytics approaches
• How to calculate the ROI of CX

Our experts will show you how Thematic works, how to discover pain points and track the ROI of decisions. To access your free trial, book a personal demo today.

Recent posts

Watercare is New Zealand's largest water and wastewater service provider. They are responsible for bringing clean water to 1.7 million people in Tamaki Makaurau (Auckland) and safeguarding the wastewater network to minimize impact on the environment. Water is a sector that often gets taken for granted, with drainage and

Become a qualitative theming pro! Creating a perfect code frame is hard, but thematic analysis software makes the process much easier.

Qualtrics is one of the most well-known and powerful Customer Feedback Management platforms. But even so, it has limitations. We recently hosted a live panel where data analysts from two well-known brands shared their experiences with Qualtrics, and how they extended this platform’s capabilities. Below, we’ll share the

Introduction to statistics

Even if you aren’t going to be doing any statistical analysis yourself, being able to interpret and critically evaluate published statistics will enable you to get the most out of the journal articles and other literature you read. This page details some commonly reported statistics and how to interpret them (although note that if you are looking to gain a more fundamental understanding of of how to interpret a few common graphs and tables and calculate a few key values, you may find that the statistics section of the Statistics and probability page of the Numeracy fundamentals module is more suitable instead).

Interpreting descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics are used to summarise and describe the data you have access to, be it:

• data for the whole population of interest (such as everyone who attends a particular school), or
• data collected from a random sample of a larger population (such as a random sample of people who were patients at a particular hospital over a two year period).

The only difference is that in the latter situation, which occurs most often, descriptive statistics do not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the wider population, so will typically be used in conjunction with other statistics. More on these shortly, but for now let’s consider the descriptive statistics in Table 1.

Table 1 Participant Characteristics

From “Examining Associations between Health, Wellbeing and Social Capital: Findings from a Survey Developed and Conducted using Participatory Action Research,” by S. Visram, S. Smith, N. Connor, G. Greig, & C. Scorer, 2018, Journal of Public Mental Health , 17 (3), p. 127 ( https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMH-09-2017-0035 ). Copyright 2018 by Emerald Publishing Limited.

This data was obtained from a sample of people who live in a particular city, and the sample size is \(233\) (as indicated by the \(n = 233\) at the bottom of the table). Moreover, there are two different types of variables summarised in this table:

• categorical variables, for data grouped into categories (the ‘Gender’ variable for example), and
• continuous variables, for numerical data (the ‘Age in years’ variable for example).

These two types of variables need to, and have been, analysed differently.

Let’s look at the categorical variables first (alternatively, if you would like more information on the different types of variables please refer to the Data and variable types page of this module).

Interpreting descriptive statistics for categorical variables

The categorical variables in this example have been summarised using percentages , and these show what percentage of the sample is in each category for the given variable (note that frequencies are sometimes used instead of percentages, and that these show how many are in each category instead). For example, the descriptive statistics for the ‘Gender’ variable show that \(65.7\%\) of the sample described in Table 1 are women and \(34.3\%\) are men.

If you would like to learn more about descriptive statistics for categorical variables, including how to calculate them, please refer to the Descriptive statistics for one categorical variable section of this module. Otherwise, to practise interpreting descriptive statistics for categorical variables have a go at the following question.

What percentage of the sample described in Table 1 are in each of the categories for the ‘Living situation’ variable?

ANSWER: \(48.7\%\) own their own home; \(30\%\) rent from a housing association; \(12.6\%\) rent from a landlord; \(7\%\) live with parents/family.

Interpreting descriptive statistics for continuous variables

The continuous variables in this example have been summarised using two measures, the first being the mean (also called the arithmetic average). This is the most commonly used measure of central tendency , and is a single value used to describe the data set by indicating the central value. For example, in Table 1 the mean for the ‘Age in years’ variable is \(47.3\), indicating that the average (or central) age of the sample of \(233\) people is \(47.3\). The second measure is the standard deviation (SD), which is the most commonly used measure of dispersion . This is a single value used to describe the data set by indicating how varied (or spread out) it is. The standard deviation for the ‘Age in years’ variable in Table 1 is \(17.4\). This is quite large relative to the mean, indicating that the variability in the ages of the sample of \(233\) people is quite large.

Summarising continuous variables using both a measure of central tendency and a measure of dispersion in this way is optimal, as one without the other does not fully describe the variable. For example, if we were only provided with \(47.3\) as the mean age of the sample then we would have no way of knowing whether everyone in the sample was \(47.3\), or whether the ages of the people in the sample were widely dispersed either side of \(47.3\). Likewise, if we were only provided with the standard deviation of \(17.4\) then we would have no way of knowing the central value of the data set.

It is important to note that the mean and standard deviation are not the only measures of central tendency and dispersion respectively though, and that they are not suitable for use in all situations. In particular when, the data set is skewed (not normally distributed; more on this later) or has outliers (a value or values that are well above or below the majority of the data) the mean and standard deviation do not accurately describe the data. For example, suppose that the vast majority of residents described in Table 1 are aged between \(40\) and \(45\), but that there is a very small group of residents aged in their \(80\)s. The latter ages would be outliers, and would cause the mean to increase above what would otherwise be the central value. In such instances the median is a more appropriate measure of central tendency (as it is not affected by outliers or skew), and the interquartile range is the accompanying measure of dispersion. So if a variable is skewed or has outliers a good piece of research will make use of the median and interquartile range as the summary measures instead.

If you would like to learn more about descriptive statistics for continuous variables, including how to calculate them, please refer to the Descriptive statistics for one continuous variable section of this module. Otherwise, to practise interpreting descriptive statistics for continuous variables have a go at the following question.

Which other continuous variable (aside from ‘Age in years’) has been summarised in Table 1, and what is its mean and standard deviation?

ANSWER: ‘Years lived in Shildon’; mean is \(32.9\) years and standard deviation is \(20.1\) years.

Interpreting inferential statistics

Inferential statistics are used to draw inferences about the wider population when data is obtained from a sample of that population, rather than from the whole population (as the latter is usually not feasible). There are lots of different inferential statistical tests, for different kinds of analysis and for different kinds of variables. For example, different tests are used for continuous and categorical variables and different tests are used for continuous variables depending on their sample size or distribution (pattern or spread of the data).

One example of a distribution that may influence the type of test used is the normal distribution . This is a special kind of distribution that large amounts of naturally occurring continuous data often approximates, and which has two key properties; that the mean, median and mode are all equal, and that fixed proportions of the data lie within certain standard deviations of the mean (\(68\%\) within one SD, \(95\%\) within two SDs and \(99.7\%\) within three SDs). When the sample size is small (typically considered below about 30), or sometimes even when it isn’t, researchers will check to see if continuous variables conform to this distribution. While this isn’t always reported on, when it is the Shapiro-Wilk test (one of a series of tests used for checking normality) is usually referred to. If an article states that variables pass this test (or more specifically, that the \(p\) value for this hypothesis test is above \(.05\)) it means that normality can be assumed. For example, Power et al. (2019) reference this when they state that the “outcomes were assessed for normality using Shapiro-Wilk” (p. 5). Other times an article might state that variables have been transformed (with a natural logarithm for example), which means that while the variables were not originally normally distributed, they have had a mathematical function applied to them which has made them so (if you would like more information on the properties of the normal distribution, and how to assess whether a variable is normally distributed, please refer to The normal distribution page of this module).

If continuous variables are normally distributed or can be transformed so that they are, or if the sample size is large enough for this not to be an issue, parametric tests are used to analyse them. Alternatively, if the sample size is small and variables are not normally distributed, or if the variables are categorical, nonparametric tests are used instead. Some examples of parametric tests include \(t\) tests, ANOVA and Pearson’s correlation, while some examples of nonparametric tests include chi-square tests, the Mann-Whitney U Test, the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, the Kruskal-Wallis One-Way ANOVA and Spearman’s Rho.

For each of these tests, a good article should include statistics that show whether any differences or relationships between variables can be considered statistically and/or practically significant in terms of the population. These terms, the relevant statistics, and how to interpret them are explained below. Alternatively, for more information on inferential statistics, including how to calculate measures of statistical and practical significance, please refer to the Inferential statistics page of this module.

Interpreting statistical significance

Statistical significance refers to the likelihood that what has been observed in the sample (for example a difference in means or a relationship between variables) could have occurred due to random chance alone. In particular, if it is very unlikely that it could have been due to chance alone then it is considered statistically significant in the population. What do we mean by ‘very unlikely’ though? This is where the \(p\) value comes in!

The \(p\) value is the probability that what has been observed could be due to random chance alone, so the lower the \(p\) value, the less likely it is that the results are due to chance. Furthermore, the value that is used as the ‘cut-off’ value to decide whether the probability is low enough or not is called the level of significance , and is denoted by \(\alpha\). Different articles may use different levels of significance, but a very common value is \(.05\). In this case, a \(p\) value less than or equal to \(.05\) means that the results are statistically significant. Other common levels of significance used are \(.01\) and \(.001\), and the article may state what level of significance the results are statistically significant at (for example, that they are statistically significant at the \(.05\) or \(.01\) level).

Note that articles will also often include confidence intervals in addition to \(p\) values. These are ranges of values that a population statistic is expected to lie between with a given level of certainty, which is usually \(95\%\) (in which case it is referred to as a \(95\%\) confidence interval). Confidence intervals can also be used to determine statistical significance (at the \(.05\) level of significance for a \(95\%\) confidence interval), and have the added benefit of providing extra information (for example, the magnitude and direction of a difference between means).

As an example of both \(p\) values and confidence intervals consider Table 2, which displays descriptive statistics together with \(p\) values and confidence intervals for a series of variables. The latter two statistics enable us to determine if there is a statistically significant difference in means between the two groups (adolescents with and without cerebral palsy) at the .05 level of significance for each of the variables.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics, \(95\%\) CIs and \(p\) values for a study investigating mental and physical health of adults with cerebral palsy

From “Health-Related Quality of Life and Mental Health of Adolescents with Cerebral Palsy in Rural Bangladesh,” by R. Power, M. Muhit, E. Heanoy, T. Karim, N. Badawi, R. Akhter, & G. Khandaker, 2019, PLOS One , 14 (6), p. 9 ( https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217675 ). CC-BY.

As an example let’s consider at the ‘Total score’ variable, which is the total score on a questionnaire regarding health-related quality of life. The mean difference of \(11.9\) is the difference in ‘Total score’ means between those with cerebral palsy and those without in the sample, and this is a descriptive statistic. The \(95\%\) confidence interval of \(10.1\) to \(13.7\) indicates that we are \(95\%\) confident the sample has come from a population where the difference in means is somewhere between \(10.1\) and \(13.7\), and the fact that this \(95\%\) confidence interval does not include the value of \(0\) (which would indicate no difference in the means) indicates that the difference in means between the two groups is statistically significant at the \(.05\) level of significance.

The fact that \(p < .0001\) also tells us that the difference in means between the two groups is statistically significant, not only at the \(.05\) level of significance but even at the \(.0001\) level of significance. The statistics for the remaining variables can be analysed in the same way; to practise doing this, have a go at the following questions.

Within which range of values is the difference in means for the ‘Peer and social support’ variable expected to lie with \(95\%\) certainty? Does this indicate that the difference in means is statistically significant at the \(.05\) level of significance?

ANSWER: The difference is expected to lie between \(3.7\) and \(8.6\) with \(95\%\) certainty; as this range does not include \(0\) it indicates that the difference is statistically significant at the \(5\%\) level of significance.

Is the difference in means statistically significant for the ‘School environment’ variable at the \(.05\) level of significance? What about at the \(.01\) level of significance?

ANSWER: It is statistically significant at the \(.05\) level of significance, as \(p < .05\) and the confidence interval does not contain \(0\), but not at the \(.01\) level of significance as \(p > .01\).

Interpreting practical significance

Practical significance refers to whether something observed in a sample (for example a difference in means or a relationship between variables) is meaningful in a practical sense or not. It is determined by calculating an effect size , which is different for different tests. For example:

• Cohen’s d is a measure of effect size for \(t\) tests
• Pearson’s correlation coefficient is a measure of effect size for Pearson’s correlation
• Phi, Cramer’s V, odds ratio and relative risk are common measures of effect size for the chi-square test of independence.

Articles that report on practical significance provide an important additional perspective to those that only report on statistical significance, as the latter alone does not allow the reader to have an appreciation of whether the findings are important in a real-life sense or not. In particular, the fact that statistical significance is influenced by sample size means that in very large samples, very small differences that are not actually meaningful in real life may be found to be statistically significant, and conversely in very small samples, very large differences that are meaningful in real life may not be found to be statistically significant. This relates to the statistical power of a test, which is the probability that an effect of a certain size will be found to be statistically significant. In particular, a calculation can be performed to determine how big a sample needs to be in order to observe an effect of a certain size at a certain level of significance for a given power (usually \(0.8\) or above), so articles may also refer to the power of a test.

Returning to measures of effect size, and as an example consider Table 3 which shows odds ratios in addition to \(95\%\) confidence intervals and \(p\) values. The latter two relate to the statistical significance of the association between each exposure variable and the outcome variable (L.longbeachae infection), while the odds ratios relate to the practical significance of the association.

Table 3 Odds ratios, \(95\%\) CIs and \(p\) values for a study investigating L.longbeachae infection exposures involving potting mix

From “Does using Potting Mix make you Sick? Results from a Legionella Longbeachae Case-Control Study in South Australia,” by B. A. O’Connor, J. Carman, K. Eckert, G. Tucker, R. Givney, & S. Cameron, 2007, Epidemiology and Infection , 135 (1), p. 36 ( https://doi.org/10.1017/S095026880600656X ). Copyright 2006 by Cambridge University Press.

For each exposure variable listed, the odds ratio compares the odds of exposure (relative to non-exposure) in the group with L.longbeachae infection, with the odds of exposure (relative to non-exposure) in the group without L.longbeachae infection. In other words, each odds ratio specifies how many times more or less likely those with L.longbeachae infection were to have the exposure than those without L.Longbeachae infection. An odds ratio less than \(1\) means that the group with the L.longbeachae infection are less likely to have the exposure, an odds ratio of \(1\) means that the two groups are equally likely to have the exposure, and an odds ratio greater than \(1\) means that the group with the L.longbeachae infection are more likely to have the exposure.

For example, the first odds ratio of \(4.74\) indicates that those infected with L.longbeachae were \(4.74\) times more likely to have used potting mix in the last four weeks than those not infected. According to Cohen’s conventions for interpreting effect size detailed here this indicates a medium to large effect, although note that this kind of interpretation is contextual and that interpreting practical significance is less concerned with comparing to cut-off values than statistical significance.

Furthermore, the first \(95\%\) confidence interval of \(1.65 - 13.55\) indicates that we are \(95\%\) confident that this sample comes from a population where those infected with L.longbeachae were somewhere between \(1.65\) and \(13.55\) times more likely to have used potting mix in the last four weeks than those not infected. As this confidence interval does not include the value of \(1\) (which for an odds ratio means that the odds of exposure are the same for those with and without the outcome), the association between using potting mix in the last four weeks and L.longbeachae infection is statistically significant at the \(.05\) level of significance. This is also evidenced by the \(p\) value of \(.004\).

Note that articles will often include adjusted odds ratios in addition to, or in place of, the (crude) odds ratios seen above. These are odds ratios that have been adjusted to take into account any additional confounding variables (i.e. other variables that may be having an influence on the outcome variable), and can be interpreted in the same way.

If you would like to practise interpreting some of the other odds ratios in the table, have a go at the following questions.

How many times more or less likely were those infected with L.longbeachae to be near dripping hanging pots, compared to those not infected? Is this a statistically significant association at the \(.05\) level of significance?

ANSWER: Those infected were \(2.79\) times more likely to be near dripping hanging pots, compared to those not infected with L.longbeachae. This is a statistically significant association at the \(.05\) level of significance as the \(95\%\) confidence interval does not include \(1\) and the \(p\) value is less than \(.05\).

How many times more or less likely were those infected with L.longbeachae to water down potting mix prior to use, compared to those not infected? Is this a statistically significant association at the \(.05\) level of significance?

ANSWER: Those infected were \(0.14\) times as likely to water down potting mix prior to use, compared to those not infected with L.longbeachae. Since the odds ratio is less than \(1\) this is usually expressed as a percentage less likely, which in this case is \(86\%\) (since \(1 - 0.14 = 0.86\)). This is not a statistically significant association at the \(.05\) level of significance as the \(95\%\) confidence interval includes \(1\) and the \(p\) value is greater than \(.05\).

Further example: interpreting one-way ANOVA

As another example of interpreting statistical and practical significance, consider Tables 4 and 5. These show the results of two one-way ANOVAs, used to test for significant differences in mean ‘school attachment scores’ between students of different ages and between students of different socio-economic statuses respectively.

Table 4 Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA statistics for a study investigating differences in school attachment scores between age groups

Table 5 Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA statistics for a study investigating differences in school attachment scores between socio-economic groups

From “School Attachment and Video Game Addiction of Adolescents with Divorced vs. Married Parents,” by B. TAS, 2019, TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology , 18 (2), pp. 99-100 ( https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1211160.pdf ). Copyright 2019 by The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology.

The \(p\) value for each one-way ANOVA indicates either that there is a statistically significant difference between the means of at least two of the groups (if \(p\) is less than or equal to the level of significance), or that there is no statistically significant difference in the means between any of the groups (if \(p\) is greater than the level of significance). Note that if a one-way ANOVA is statistically significant further information is needed, and should be provided, to determine which groups are significantly different from each other. This will either be the results of a planned or post hoc comparison, both of which will provide further \(p\) values which can be interpreted in the usual way.

These tables also include (amongst other statistics) an \(F\) value for each one-way ANOVA. This is the test statistic for this test (note that results of other tests will sometimes include the test value as well; a \(t\) value for a \(t\) test or chi-square value for a chi-square test of independence, for example). This \(F\) value is the ratio of the variability between groups to the variability within each group. For example, an \(F\) value of \(0.818\) for the ‘Age’ variable indicates that the variability in school attachment scores between the four age groups is \(0.818\) times the variability in school attachment scores within each age group (i.e. the variability between the groups is actually less than the variability within the groups). The bigger than \(1\) the \(F\) value is, the greater the likelihood that there is a significant difference in the means between at least two of the groups. However, note that it is the \(p\) value that needs to be interpreted in order to test this.

Lastly, the tables also include eta-squared (\(\eta^2\)) values as measures of effect size, which indicate how much variability (as a percentage) in the school attachment scores can be attributed to age and socio-economic status respectively. For example, the \(\eta^2\) value of \(0.024\) indicates that \(2.4\%\) of the variability in the school attachment scores can be attributed to age. Cohen (1988) suggests that an \(\eta^2\) value of \(.01\) be considered a small effect, \(.059\) be considered a medium effect and \(.138\) be considered a large effect.

Use the information above to answer the following questions:

Is there a statistically significant difference between the mean school attachment scores for any of the four age groups at the \(.05\) level of significance?

ANSWER: No, as the \(p\) value is greater than \(.05\) (\(p = .48\)).

How many times greater is the variability in school attachment scores between the three socio-economic groups, than the variability in school attachment scores within each socio-economic group?

ANSWER: The variability in school attachment scores between the three socio-economic groups is \(2.666\) times the variability in school attachment scores within each socio-economic group.

How much variability (as a percentage) in the school attachment scores can be attributed to socio-economic group?

ANSWER: \(5.1\%\) of the variability in the school attachment scores can be attributed to socio-economic group.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Connor, B.A., Carman, J., Eckert, K., Tucker, G., Givney, R., & Cameron, S. (2007). Does using potting mix make you sick? Results from a Legionella longbeachae case-control study in South Australia. Epidemiology and Infection, 135 (1), 34-39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095026880600656X

Power, R., Muhit, M., Heanoy, E., Karim, T., Badawi, N., Akhter, R., & Khandaker, G. (2019). Health-related quality of life and mental health of adolescents with cerebral palsy in rural Bangladesh. PLoS One, 14 (6), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217675

TAS, B. (2019). School attachment and video game addiction of adolescents with divorced vs. married parents. TOJET : The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology , 18 (2), 93-106. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1211160.pdf

Visram, S., Smith, S., Connor, N., Greig, G., & Scorer, C. (2018). Examining associations between health, wellbeing and social capital: Findings from a survey developed and conducted using participatory action research. Journal of Public Mental Health, 17 (3), 122-134. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMH-09-2017-0035

PhD Thesis Blog

Thesis and code, how to analyse and interpret data collected from an in-depth interview.

In-depth interviews are labour-intensive. They cannot finish in one attempt. The process of data analysis starts when you have collected material. However, you still cannot separate the process of gathering data from analysis. In fact, you will start analysing data as you commence an interview. Analysing the data sets off as you hear something from your participants. However, you have to be considerate during this stage as it might contaminate the next part of the interview. 

Tape-recording interviews

For better analysis, you should have words of participants in written form. The primary method to transform spoken words to written text is to transcribe the recorded material. Your consciousness will play a paramount role in the interpretation of data as it must interact with the words of participants. 

Another benefit of tape-recording interviews is you have access to the original data. If something is not clear in a transcript, you can return to the source and check accuracy. Further, you can also avoid the accusation of mishandling data by demonstrating your accountability to data. The tape-recording method also enables you to improve your interview techniques.

Transcribe interview tapes

Transcribing interview tapes is an arduous task and potentially costly too. As a substitute, you should listen to tapes a number of times and then pick up the most important section and transcribe that part only. However, this is not an advisable approach because it may lead to premature judgment about what is essential and what is not. 

How to study and analyse the text

In-depth interviews generate a colossal amount of information. Organised in several stages, these interviews emanate records full of long sentences, words, paragraphs and pages. It is requisite that you pick up information that is most relevant to answer your research questions and meet research objectives. The most crucial thing is that you reduce data by inductive approach rather than deductive approach. 

The first step to reduce the text is to read it and mark with brackets the passages that seem important and interesting. While winnowing the text, you may feel unable to decide on the significant paragraphs. You will feel like falling into the trap of self-delusion. Therefore, you can later check with the participants to see if what they have marked as important seem interesting to participants or not.  

Sharing interview data

Your ultimate goal of marking text as important from a transcript is to shape it in a presentable form. You can use two basic ways to share interview data. First, you can develop profiles of individual participants and group them into categories. Second, you can mark individual passages, group and study them in categories.

There is no right way to craft profiles for sharing interview data. Some researchers present the text in charts and graphs, and some give priority to words more than a graphical representation. Once you have read the transcript, marked passages of interest, and labelled those passages, you will put all those passages in a single transcript. This version may result in one-third of the original interview script. 

The next step is to read the new version and underline paragraphs that are compelling. Be faithful to the words of participants. You may be tempted to introduce some words to make transitions between passages. You can let readers know when words of participants have not been used by using ellipses or brackets around your own text. 

Making and analysing thematic connections

While reading interview transcripts, you can label the text that you find interesting and important in the context of your research questions. Further, you will decide on a word or phrase in which labelled passages can fit. Sometimes, you may find a term from a paragraph itself. Assigning a particular term to each selected paragraph is known as categorising. This entire process is also known as coding. This is essential so that a computer programme can quickly sort and classify interview data. 

Interpreting the material

Interpretation is not a stage that begins at the end of an interview. The interpretation process starts as you ask questions from your participants. Marking interesting passages, labelling them and categorising them is an analytic work that calls for an interpretation. Visit here for detailed information on Data Analysis.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

FBI says Chinese hackers preparing to attack US infrastructure

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by Christopher Bing; Editing by Richard Chang

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

Thomson Reuters

Award-winning reporter covering the intersection between technology and national security with a focus on how the evolving cybersecurity landscape affects government and business.

Technology Chevron

Us charges, sanctions iranians linked to revolutionary guard cyber command.

The U.S. government on Tuesday announced criminal charges and sanctions against four Iranians over an alleged multi-year cyber campaign targeting more than one dozen American companies, the Treasury Department and the State Department said.

Temenos reported first-quarter total software licensing revenue of $84 million on Tuesday, falling short of estimates, and announced the appointment of Jean-Pierre Brulard as chief executive.