As Ian Dey notes, the conceptual elements of categories, properties, and dimensions can be a muddle and the distinction between them can get confused. Since one of my main goals with this slice 5 will be to code categories and sub-categories for their properties and dimensions, I am seeking with this post to clarify distinctions and definitions (so I know what I’m doing). I hope to establish a loose anchor to guide my coding in this post: that is, a framework for analysis that is not too rigid or mechanistic, but one provide general guidance that allows for flexibility in discovery. Yet, I don’t want this framework to be so loose that I wander through my analysis making contradictions all along the way.
Guiding Principle
Let it happen.
“An analyst is coding for explanations and to gain an understanding of phenomena” (Strauss and Corbin 129).
Strauss and Corbin describe the confusion that exists for analysts as they rigidly try to categorize things/events into the boxes of their coding, especially when they code the same event or happening in two different ways. They state, “We realize that beginners need structure and that placing data into descrete boxes makes them feel more in control of their analyses. However, we want them to realize that such practices tend to prevent them from capturing the dynamic flow of events and the complex nature of relationships that, in the end, make explanations of phenomena interesting, plausible, and complete” (129). They advise “to let it happen.” Rigor and vigor, they say, will follow.
Categories
A category is an abstract label used as a heading or name for a class of objects, events, happenings that share similar characteristics. It is the most logical descriptor for what is going on. The distinction between “concept” and “category” can be confusing. In a sense, all coding (categories, properties, dimensions) is conceptual in that you are creating an abstract representation of the phenomena. Categories are said to be groupings of concepts that are labeled or named phenomena by like or similar characteristics. Dey presents a good critique of this generation of categories through groupings according to similarities and differences, and says we must be more reflective about how we generate and use them (255).
Strauss and Corbin--
“Categories: Concepts that stand for phenomena.” (101)
Dey:
“Category—used as a way to identify or distinguish something based on comparisons with other things.” (252)
Sub-categories
Sub-categories specify a category more by denoting information such as when, where, why, and how. It seems like the notion of sub-categories and properties might be confusing. If for example, we had the category “drug using” (example from Strauss and Corbin), then a sub-category might be “types of drugs.” Grouped within “types of drugs” would the different drugs (cocaine, pot, ecstasy ect.). These sub-categories would then have properties such as forms, effects, how used. We shall see about sub-categories. (I think I need to see more examples.)
Strauss and Corgin offer a definition of sub-categories:
“Subcategories: Concepts that pertain to a category, giving it further clarification and specification.” (101)
Properties
Properties are the recognizable characteristics or attributes or the phenomena. These attributes determine how it is classified or categorized.
Strauss and Corbin simply state properties are the
“Characteristics of a category, the delineation of which defines and gives it meaning.” (101)
Dey--
“Property—used to ascribe a quality or attribute to something based on analyzing its interactions with other things” (252)
Again, I am somewhat unclear how to distinguish a sub-category from a property.
Dimensions represent the location of a property, that is a characteristic or attribute, along a continuum or range. Dimensions measure degree, not kind.
Strauss and Corbin--
“The range along which general properties of a category vary, giving specification to a category and variation to a theory.” (101)
Dey--
“Dimensions—used to measure extension.” (252)
So we have a few examples of the category, property, dimension breakdown:
Category: Color
Properties: shade, hue, intensity
Dimensions: high/bright----low/faint
(from bright shade to faint shade, from high hue to faint hue, from high intensity to low intensity)
Category: Orange (as in fruit)
Properties: size, color, shape, weight, cost
Dimensions: high/big/bright----low/small/faint
(large size to small size, bright color to faint color, big shape to small shape?, high cost to low cost)
The problem with these examples of categories, properties, and dimensions is they are of THINGS and not PHENOMENA. Still they are helpful in seeing the relationship between properties and dimensions. Dimensions provide the description of variation and degree of phenomena.
Dey ends his book by quoting what Strauss and Corbin identify as the central features of the grounded theory methodology. I will present these in list form:
1. the grounding of theory upon data through data-theory interplay
2. the making of constant comparisons
3. the asking of theoretically oriented questions
4. theoretical coding
5. the development of theory (269)
So my quest in this next slice of coding will be to articulate the properties of my categories more explicitly and identify the dimensions or range that these attributes fall within. This post has helped my establish distinctions I can use in my analysis, but I must remember that these distinctions remain a loose anchor and my overall goal remains to “coding for explanations and to gain an understanding of phenomena” as best I can.
My goal will be next to begin my coding discuss my own categories along these lines of properties and dimensions.
