Concurrent analysis: a pragmatic justification

Austyn Snowden, John Atkinson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Concurrent analysis (CA) is a process of synthesizing conceptually equivalent data for the purpose of producing a coherent and predictive model in social science. The process of CA is detailed. In short, CA uses Thagard's concept of coherence as a method of explicating links between mental representations. The product is a wide analysis of all pertinent data. This paper provides a philosophical justification for the need and function of CA. The paper is divided into three sections. The first section reviews some problems with the metasynthetic literature. The purpose of this is that CA can be initially understood as a branch of this type of synthesis. The second section links Risjord's post-paradigmatic position to Rorty's version of pragmatism in order to show the importance of the concept of coherence to these views. The reason for linking these issues is that CA is grounded in rejection of ontological priority. Instead it prioritises a pragmatic conception of coherence. The final section details the mechanics of CA. Concurrent analysis is presented as the most coherent method of synthesizing certain types of narrative evidence if pragmatism is prioritized over ontology. Examples are given from published studies using CA to illustrate the detail of the analysis and the practical value of the product. The examples show that CA appears useful under certain circumstances. These circumstances will be specified, and strengths and weaknesses of the method will be discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)126-141
JournalNursing Philosophy
Volume13
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2012

Keywords

  • epistemology
  • ethics
  • methodology
  • nursing research
  • philosophy of science

Cite this

Snowden, Austyn ; Atkinson, John. / Concurrent analysis: a pragmatic justification. In: Nursing Philosophy. 2012 ; Vol. 13, No. 2. pp. 126-141.
@article{8a252f9423d548a4bb8303ef53b1ac8a,
title = "Concurrent analysis: a pragmatic justification",
abstract = "Concurrent analysis (CA) is a process of synthesizing conceptually equivalent data for the purpose of producing a coherent and predictive model in social science. The process of CA is detailed. In short, CA uses Thagard's concept of coherence as a method of explicating links between mental representations. The product is a wide analysis of all pertinent data. This paper provides a philosophical justification for the need and function of CA. The paper is divided into three sections. The first section reviews some problems with the metasynthetic literature. The purpose of this is that CA can be initially understood as a branch of this type of synthesis. The second section links Risjord's post-paradigmatic position to Rorty's version of pragmatism in order to show the importance of the concept of coherence to these views. The reason for linking these issues is that CA is grounded in rejection of ontological priority. Instead it prioritises a pragmatic conception of coherence. The final section details the mechanics of CA. Concurrent analysis is presented as the most coherent method of synthesizing certain types of narrative evidence if pragmatism is prioritized over ontology. Examples are given from published studies using CA to illustrate the detail of the analysis and the practical value of the product. The examples show that CA appears useful under certain circumstances. These circumstances will be specified, and strengths and weaknesses of the method will be discussed.",
keywords = "epistemology, ethics, methodology, nursing research, philosophy of science",
author = "Austyn Snowden and John Atkinson",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1111/j.1466-769X.2011.00523.x",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "126--141",
journal = "Nursing Philosophy",
issn = "1466-7681",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "2",

}

Concurrent analysis: a pragmatic justification. / Snowden, Austyn; Atkinson, John.

In: Nursing Philosophy, Vol. 13, No. 2, 04.2012, p. 126-141.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Concurrent analysis: a pragmatic justification

AU - Snowden, Austyn

AU - Atkinson, John

PY - 2012/4

Y1 - 2012/4

N2 - Concurrent analysis (CA) is a process of synthesizing conceptually equivalent data for the purpose of producing a coherent and predictive model in social science. The process of CA is detailed. In short, CA uses Thagard's concept of coherence as a method of explicating links between mental representations. The product is a wide analysis of all pertinent data. This paper provides a philosophical justification for the need and function of CA. The paper is divided into three sections. The first section reviews some problems with the metasynthetic literature. The purpose of this is that CA can be initially understood as a branch of this type of synthesis. The second section links Risjord's post-paradigmatic position to Rorty's version of pragmatism in order to show the importance of the concept of coherence to these views. The reason for linking these issues is that CA is grounded in rejection of ontological priority. Instead it prioritises a pragmatic conception of coherence. The final section details the mechanics of CA. Concurrent analysis is presented as the most coherent method of synthesizing certain types of narrative evidence if pragmatism is prioritized over ontology. Examples are given from published studies using CA to illustrate the detail of the analysis and the practical value of the product. The examples show that CA appears useful under certain circumstances. These circumstances will be specified, and strengths and weaknesses of the method will be discussed.

AB - Concurrent analysis (CA) is a process of synthesizing conceptually equivalent data for the purpose of producing a coherent and predictive model in social science. The process of CA is detailed. In short, CA uses Thagard's concept of coherence as a method of explicating links between mental representations. The product is a wide analysis of all pertinent data. This paper provides a philosophical justification for the need and function of CA. The paper is divided into three sections. The first section reviews some problems with the metasynthetic literature. The purpose of this is that CA can be initially understood as a branch of this type of synthesis. The second section links Risjord's post-paradigmatic position to Rorty's version of pragmatism in order to show the importance of the concept of coherence to these views. The reason for linking these issues is that CA is grounded in rejection of ontological priority. Instead it prioritises a pragmatic conception of coherence. The final section details the mechanics of CA. Concurrent analysis is presented as the most coherent method of synthesizing certain types of narrative evidence if pragmatism is prioritized over ontology. Examples are given from published studies using CA to illustrate the detail of the analysis and the practical value of the product. The examples show that CA appears useful under certain circumstances. These circumstances will be specified, and strengths and weaknesses of the method will be discussed.

KW - epistemology

KW - ethics

KW - methodology

KW - nursing research

KW - philosophy of science

U2 - 10.1111/j.1466-769X.2011.00523.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1466-769X.2011.00523.x

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 126

EP - 141

JO - Nursing Philosophy

JF - Nursing Philosophy

SN - 1466-7681

IS - 2

ER -