Qualitative Research Methods in Cultural Inquiry: Designs, Techniques and Applications

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 3, 659 - 676, 31.12.2025

Gıyasettin Yıldız

https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.1660623

Öz

This article aims to furnish researchers with a practical guide by systematically comparing widely used qualitative research designs and their attendant data-collection and analysis procedures within an integrative framework. Anchored in ethnography, phenomenology, critical discourse analysis and digital ethnography, the study summarises the context-specific advantages and limitations of techniques such as in-depth interviewing, participant observation, visual-audiovisual document analysis and social-media mining through advantage–disadvantage matrices. It also explicates commonly employed coding workflows for analytic approaches—including thematic analysis, grounded theory and multimodal semiotics—while underscoring the contributions of triangulation, member checking and reflexive journaling to quality assurance. By foregrounding the fragile balance among data-source diversity, ethical imperatives and methodological choice, the article seeks to facilitate consistent decision-making in field research. The interdisciplinary guide developed consequently consolidates fragmented practices within the literature and offers concrete recommendations for reducing methodological uncertainty in cultural inquiry.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Qualitative research method , cultural meaning , designs , techniques , applications

Etik Beyan

There is no need for an ethics committee decision for this research.

Destekleyen Kurum

No funding was used to conduct the research.

Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri ile Kültürel İnceleme: Desenler, Teknikler ve Uygulamalar

Öz

Bu makale, kültürel incelemelerde yaygın biçimde kullanılan nitel araştırma desenlerini ve bunlara eşlik eden veri toplama-analiz adımlarını bütüncül bir çerçevede karşılaştırarak araştırmacılara işlevsel bir rehber sunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Etnografi, fenomenoloji, eleştirel söylem analizi ve dijital etnografi ana ekseninde ilerleyen çalışma; derinlemesine görüşme, katılımcı gözlem, görsel‑işitsel belge incelemesi ve sosyal medya taraması gibi tekniklerin bağlama özgü avantajları ile sınırlılıklarını avantaj-dezavantaj tabloları aracılığıyla özetlenmektedir. Ayrıca tematik analiz, gömülü teori ve çok‑modlu göstergebilim gibi çözümleme yaklaşımları için uygulamada sık rastlanan kodlama akışlarını pratik örneklerle açıklayarak kalite güvencesi için üçgenleme, katılımcı doğrulaması ve refleksif kaydın katkısına vurgu yapmaktadır. Çalışma, veri kaynağı çeşitliliği, etik gereklilikler ve yöntem seçimi arasındaki dengenin kırılgan olduğu saha araştırmalarında tutarlı kararlar alınmasına yardımcı olmayı hedefler. Sonuçta geliştirilen disiplinlerarası rehber, alanyazındaki parçalı uygulamaları birleştirerek kültürel incelemelerdeki yöntemsel belirsizlikleri azaltmaya yönelik somut öneriler sunar.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Nitel araştırma yöntemi , kültürel anlam , desenler , teknikler , uygulamalar

Etik Beyan

Bu araştırma için etik kurul kararına ihtiyaç yoktur.

Destekleyen Kurum

Araştırmanın yürütülmesinde herhangi bir fon kullanılmamıştır.

Kaynakça

• Adorno, W. T., & Horkheimer, M. (2014). Aydınlanmanın diyalektiği. İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınları.
• Appadurai, A. (2013). The future as cultural fact: Essays on the global condition. Verso Books.
• Banks, M. (2014). Analysing images. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 394-408). SAGE Publications.
• Barthes, R. (1967). Elements of semiology (A. Lavers & C. Smith, Trans.). Hill and Wang.
• Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (2008). Gerçekliğin sosyal inşası: Bir bilgi sosyolojisi incelemesi (V. S. Öğütle, Çev.). Paradigma Yayınları.
• Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge.
• Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802-1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870
• Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Prentice-Hall.
• Boellstorff, T. (2008). Coming of age in second life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human. Princeton University Press.
• Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
• Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2, 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
• Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545-547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547
• Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell Publishing.
• Chandler, D. (2017). Semiotics: The basics (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., & Vrontis, D. (2021). Does data-driven culture impact innovation and performance of a firm? An empirical examination. Annals of Operations Research, 333, 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03887-z
• Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. Jossey-Bass.
• Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. SAGE Publications.
• Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. E. (Eds.). (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. University of California Press.
• Coffey, A. (1999). The ethnographic self: Fieldwork and the representation of identity. Sage Publications.
• Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). Routledge.
• Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4. bs.). Sage Publications.
• Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
• Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Ellis, C. S., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Historical Social Research, 36(4), 273-290.
• Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). SAGE Publications.
• Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
• Esin, C., Fathi, M., & Squire, C. (2014). Narrative analysis: The constructionist approach. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 203-216). Sage Publications.
• Eyrek, A. (2022). Kadın hareketinde direniş temsili olarak ‘Damızlık Kızın Öyküsü’. Etkileşim, 5(10), 122-142. https://doi.org/10.32739/etkilesim.2022.5.10.172
• Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Routledge.
• Fan, L., Yu, H., & Gilliland, A. (2021). #StopAsianHate: Archiving and analyzing Twitter discourse in the wake of the 2021 Atlanta spa shootings. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58(1), 440-444. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.475
• Finlay, L. (2002). Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Research, 2(2), 209-230. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879410200200205
• Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Foucault, M. (2002). The archaeology of knowledge (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1969)
• Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., Ess, C., & AoIR Ethics Working Committee. (2020). Internet research: Ethical guidelines 3.0. Association of Internet Researchers. https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf
• Gadamer, H. G. (2004). Truth and method (2nd rev. ed., J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). Continuum. (Original work published 1960)
• Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. Basic Books. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Publishing.
• Görmüş, K., & Yıldırım, F. (2023). Geçmişten günümüze çalışan destek programları: Psikososyal destek hizmetleri bağlamında bir değerlendirme. Sosbilder, 16(2), 186-218. https://doi.org/10.32955/sosbilder2023162733
• Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. SAGE Publications.
• Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. SAGE Publications.
• Hall, S. (Ed.). (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. SAGE Publications.
• Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Hooks, B. (1989). Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking Black. South End Press.
• Husserl, E. (1970). Logical investigations (J. N. Findlay, Trans.). Humanities Press. (Original work published 1900–1901)
• Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3. bs., s. 559-603). Sage Publications.
• Kim, Y., Nordgren, R., & Emery, S. (2020). The story of Goldilocks and three Twitter’s APIs: A pilot study on Twitter data sources and disclosure. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(20), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17207418
• Koch, T., & Kralik, D. (2006). Participatory action research in health care. Blackwell Publishing.
• Kozinets, R. V. (2015). Netnography: Redefined (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2019). Datenaufbereitung und Datenbereinigung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. In N. Baur & J. Blasius (Eds.), Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung (2nd ed., pp. 441-456). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21308-4_31
• Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts (pp. 12–44). University of Washington Press.
• Lin, R., & Wichadakul, D. (2022). Interpretable deep learning model reveals subsequences of various functions for long non-coding RNA identification. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.02.11.479495
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
• Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2012). Ethical decision-making and internet research 2.0: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee. Association of Internet Researchers. https://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf
• Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. University of Chicago Press.
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (2002). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945)
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Najafi, A., Mugurtay, N., Zouzou, Y., et al. (2024). First public dataset to study 2023 Turkish general election. Scientific Reports, 14, 8794. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58006-w
• Ning, L., Gao, Q., & Liu, J. (2024). How to realize the collaborative supply of cultural resource big data with government participation: Experiences from China. Sustainability, 16(20), Article 8831. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208831
• Perriam, J., Birkbak, A., & Freeman, A. (2019). Digital methods in a post-API environment. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1682840
• Pink, S. (2013). Doing visual ethnography (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Said, E. W. (1999). Şarkiyatçılık: Batı’nın şark anlayışları (B. Ülner, Trans.). Metis Yayınları.
• Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Schuitema, K. (2016). Social memory and identity in the gentrifying neighbourhood of Tophane (Istanbul). In M. D. Álvarez (Ed.), Heritage tourism destinations: Preservation, communication and development (pp. 22-41). CAB International.
• Silver, C., & Lewins, A. (2014). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
• Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271-313). University of Illinois Press.
• Teherani, A., Martimianakis, T., Stenfors-Hayes, T., Wadhwa, A., & Varpio, L. (2015). Choosing a qualitative research approach. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 7(4), 669-670. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-15-00414.1
• Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
• Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Wiley-Blackwell.
• Utku, A., & Can, Ü. (2022). COVID-19’un yayılım tahminine yönelik makine öğrenmesi ve derin öğrenme tabanlı karşılaştırmalı bir analiz: Türkiye için örnek bir çalışma. Fırat Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 34(2), 709-717. https://doi.org/10.35234/fumbd.1125609
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Multidisciplinary CDA: A plea for diversity. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 95–120). SAGE Publications.
• Zaimakis, Y., & Oikonomakis, L. (2021). Walls of resistance in critical times: A reflection on political graffiti and visual protest in Southern Europe and Latin America (Chap. 3, pp. 75-101) [PDF]. Berghahn Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2tsxk6z.7