Proposing the use of an “Advocatus Diaboli” as a Pragmatic Approach to Improve Transparency in Qualitative Data Analysis and Reporting

Qualitative data analysis is widely adopted for user evaluation, not only in the Visualisation community but also related communities, such as Human-Computer Interaction and Augmented and Virtual Reality. However, the data analysis process is often not clearly described and the results are often simply listed in the form of in-teresting quotes from or summaries of quotes that were uttered by study participants. This position paper proposes an early concept for the use of a researcher as an “Advocatus Diaboli”, or devil's advocate, to try to disprove the results of the data analysis by looking for quotes that contradict the findings or leading questions and task designs. Whatever this devil's advocate finds can then be used to reiterate on the findings and the analysis process to form more suitable theories. On the other hand, researchers are enabled to clarify why they did not include this in their theory. This process could increase transparency in the qualitative data analysis process and increase trust in these findings, while being mindful of the necessary resources.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/beliv64461.2024.00005
Primary Topic
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Proposing the use of an “Advocatus Diaboli” as a Pragmatic Approach to Improve Transparency in Qualitative Data Analysis and Reporting

Judith Friedl
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
article

Proposing the use of an “Advocatus Diaboli” as a Pragmatic Approach to Improve Transparency in Qualitative Data Analysis and Reporting

Judith Friedl
article en

Abstract

Qualitative data analysis is widely adopted for user evaluation, not only in the Visualisation community but also related communities, such as Human-Computer Interaction and Augmented and Virtual Reality. However, the data analysis process is often not clearly described and the results are often simply listed in the form of in-teresting quotes from or summaries of quotes that were uttered by study participants. This position paper proposes an early concept for the use of a researcher as an “Advocatus Diaboli”, or devil's advocate, to try to disprove the results of the data analysis by looking for quotes that contradict the findings or leading questions and task designs. Whatever this devil's advocate finds can then be used to reiterate on the findings and the analysis process to form more suitable theories. On the other hand, researchers are enabled to clarify why they did not include this in their theory. This process could increase transparency in the qualitative data analysis process and increase trust in these findings, while being mindful of the necessary resources.

University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria (AT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.