Analysis Framework for Interviews ① — Connecting Cards with Keywords #05

In the previous article, I introduced two basic frameworks I use for qualitative research analysis: the "Causal-Oppositional Relationship Analysis Method" and the "Hierarchical Relationship Analysis Method." In this article, I will explain the former.
I have written out the flow of the analysis, assuming that the stakeholders of the interview have gathered to conduct an analysis exercise in a workshop format.

STEP 1: Write statements and reactions on cards (Carding)

Statements and reactions during an interview are recorded as a "transcript" by a scribe or through automatic transcription of recordings. Carding is performed while reviewing this transcript.
While reading the transcript, you write down each statement and reaction onto individual cards. Statements should be broken down into the smallest units that convey a complete meaning, ensuring that each card contains only one unit or nuance.
What you write on the cards are "facts." Facts mainly include the following:
① Personal profile: Occupation, family structure, lifestyle, personality, values, etc.
② Behavior and awareness regarding the research subject category, specific brands, or products/services: Usage status, purchase history, evaluation, etc.
③ Reactions to items presented during the interview (concept drafts, etc.): Evaluations and their reasons, etc.
Include the above in the cards, not just from statements, but also from what can be read from facial expressions and behavior.
Do not include interpretations at this stage. Simply write down "what happened and what was said." That is the basis of carding.

STEP 2: Connect cards using causal and oppositional relationships

Once the cards are ready, find relationships by asking, "What is the relationship between this card and that card?" Note that you should not be overly conscious of which theme or interview question the statement belongs to; instead, look only at the content written on the cards and think, "Which card does this connect to?" It is easier to make discoveries if you are not bound by the original context in which the statement was made.
There are two ways cards can be connected.

[Causal Relationship] Relationships connected by "therefore" or "because"

The image is that the top card A is the cause, and the bottom card B is the result. Read from top to bottom as "A, therefore B." Conversely, when starting from the result B, look for the cause by reading from bottom to top as "B, because A." Confirm that the two cards connect from both top and bottom directions.

[Oppositional Relationship] Relationships connected by "but" or "however"

This is a relationship where A and B are contradictory or opposing. In the form of "A, but B," place the point you want to emphasize or the one closer to the true intention in position B on the right. Oppositional relationships can exist between individual cards or between entire clusters.

Also, do not force cards that do not naturally connect. Proceed while confirming whether they can be explained by "therefore," "because," or "but."

One more thing. There may be cases where multiple cards appear that are not causal or oppositional but have almost the same meaning or say the same thing despite different wording or expressions. Group these cards as "synonyms" or "examples." Bundle them by placing the most symbolic card on top, or summarize and rewrite them to make them easier to understand.

STEP 3: "Islands" begin to form

As you connect them, clusters of multiple connected cards will emerge. We call these "islands."

[Concrete Example] In an interview about health drinks—

Suppose the following facts emerged from an interview with a user:
• Loves rich cream flavor • Rich cream flavor makes me feel luxurious • Want to stay slim forever • Usually drink unsweetened, light oat milk • As a treat, I drink a cafe latte made with rich milk with a drizzle of honey
When you line up these cards and look for relationships, they connect like this.

First, there are two causal relationships. "Rich cream flavor makes me feel luxurious" → (therefore) "Loves rich cream flavor" → (therefore) "As a treat, I drink a cafe latte made with rich milk with a drizzle of honey." Another one: "Want to stay slim forever" → (therefore) "Usually drink unsweetened, light oat milk."

Next, an oppositional relationship. The action of "As a treat, I drink a cafe latte made with rich milk with a drizzle of honey" and the action of "Usually drink unsweetened, light oat milk." This is an oppositional relationship connected by "but."

STEP 4: Think about the meaning of the island = Interpret

Once an island is formed, think about "What does this island mean?"
In the previous example, at first glance, this user's preferences and actions seem contradictory. They actually want to enjoy the richness of the flavor, but a strong will to "stay slim" is at work, so they choose something different from their preference. However, they don't completely deny themselves; they satisfy their preference by convincing themselves in the form of a treat. In other words, an interpretation emerges that they have found their own "compromise" for the "conflict" between their food preferences and beauty consciousness.

Thinking about "What does this island mean?" in this way is "interpretation." In the article before last, I wrote that thinking about "What does this fact mean for the client's marketing challenge?" is "analysis." In other words, interpreting facts (what the island represents) within the context of the client's marketing challenge can be called "analysis."

Simple, yet surprisingly deep

Analysis using this Causal-Oppositional Relationship Analysis Method is not a difficult task. You just keep connecting cards while repeating the questions "Why?", "Therefore?", and "But?" It is relatively easy to find relationships, and some people might be let down, thinking, "Is it really this simple?"
However, what is important is what can be said from the entire island formed by the connected cards, and that the path of such interpretation is clearly visible. It is that anyone who sees it can think, "I see, it is properly a causal/oppositional relationship" and "I can see how this is interpreted from the island as a whole." If it is something that anyone can see and anyone can do, then it is a reproducible, scientific method. In other words, it is not a black box. Don't you think you could do this kind of analysis yourself?