Skip to main content
Log in

Text Analysis Software: Commonalities, Differences and Limitations: The Results of a Review

  • Published:
Quality and Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we discuss the tendencies infunctionality and technology of software for textanalysis and reflect on those areas where moredevelopment is needed. The basis for this discussionforms a comprehensive review of fifteen currentlyavailable software for text analysis (Alexa and Zuell,1999). In the review the following software packageswere individually presented in a detailed andextensive manner: AQUAD, ATLAS.ti, CoAn, Code-A-Text,DICTION, DIMAP-MCCA, HyperRESEARCH, KEDS,NUD*IST, QED, TATOE, TEXTPACK, TextSmart,WinMAXpro, and WordStat. Here we only delineate ourmethodology and criteria for selecting which programsto review and concentrate on discussing the types ofsupport the selected programs offer, the commonalitiesand differences of their functionality, point to someof their shortcomings and put forward suggestions forfuture development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexa, M. & Rostek, L. (1996). Computer-assisted, corpus-based analysis text with TATOE'. ALLC-ACH96, Book of Abstracts. Bergen, Norway, University of Bergen, pp. 11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexa, M. & Zuell, C. (1999). Software for Computer-Assisted Text Analysis: A Review. ZUMA Nachrichten Spezial. Mannheim, Germany: ZUMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexa, M. & Schmidt, I. (1999). Modell einer mehrschichtigen Textannotation für die computerunterstützte Textanalyse. In W. Möhr & I. Schmidt (eds), SGML/XML - Anwendungen und Perspektiven. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Depuis, A. & Tornabene, E. (1993). HyperRESEARCHTM from ResearchWare: A Content Analysis Tool for the Qualitative Researcher. Randolph, MA: ResearchWare, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, W. (1996). Computer-supported content analysis. Social Science Computer Review 114(3): 269–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding, N. G. & Lee, R. M. (1991). Using Computers in Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, R. P. (1985). Systemic analysis of political discourse: The development of DICTION. In: K. Sanders (eds), Political Communication Yearbook: 1984. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 97–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. L. (1997). Analysis of Qualitative Data with AQUADFive for Windows. Schwangau, Germany: Ingeborg Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. (1997a). Classification of Text Analysis Software. In: R. Klar & O. Oppitz (eds), Classification and Knowledge Organization. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Gesellschaft fuer Klassifikation e.V. Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 355–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. (1997b). INTEXT-Handbuch, Version 4.0. Jena, Germany: Mimeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuckartz, U. (1998). WinMAX: Scientific Text Analysis for the Social Sciences. User's guide. Berlin: BSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lezius, W., Rapp, R. & Wettler, M. (1998). A freely available morphological analyzer, disambiguator, and context sensitive lemmatizer for German. In: Proceedings of the COLING-ACL 1998, Canada.

  • McTavish, D. G. & Pirro E. B. (1990). Contextual content analysis. Quality and Quantity 24: 245–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTavish, D., Litkowski K. C. & Schrader S. (1997). A computer content analysis approach to measuring social distance in residential organizations for older people. Social Science Computer Review 15(2): 170–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. A., Beckwith, R., Fellbaum, Chr., Cross, D., Miller, K. & Tengi, R. (1993). Five papers on WordNetTM. CSL Report 43. Cognitive Science Laboratory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohler, P. Ph. & Zuell, C. (1998). TEXTPACK User's Guide. Mannheim: ZUMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muhr, T. (1997). ATLAS.ti the Knowledge Workbench: Visual Qualitative Data AnalysisManagement Model Building. Short User's Manual (Version 4.1 for Windows 95 and Windows NT). Berlin: Scientific Software Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muhr, Th. (1996). Textinterpretation und Theorienentwicklung mit Atlas/ti. In: W. Bos & C. Tarnai (eds), Computerunterstuetzte Inhaltsanalyse in den empirischen Sozialwissenschaften. Muenster: Waxmann, pp. 245–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, L. (1998). NUD*IST Introductory Handbook. Victoria, Australia: QSR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, C. W., ed. (1997). Text Analysis for the Social Sciences: Methods for Drawing Statistical Inferences from Texts and Transcripts. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostek, L. & Alexa, M. (1998). Marking up in TATOE and exporting to SGML. Computers and the Humanities 31: 311–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrodt, Ph. A. (1998). KEDS: Kansas Event Data System. Version 0.9B7. Kansas University: http://www.ukans.edu/~keds/.

  • Stone, Ph. J. (1997). Thematic text analysis: New agendas for analysing text content. In: C. W. Roberts (ed.), Text Analysis for the Social Sciences: Methods for Drawing Statistical Inferences from Texts and Transcripts. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. Publishers, pp. 35–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools. New York: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesch, R. (1991). Software for qualitative researchers: Analysis needs and program capabilities. In: N. G. Fielding and R. M. Lee (eds), Using Computers in Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • TextSmartTM 1.0 (1997). User's Guide. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, E. A. & Miles, M. B. (1995). A Software Sourcebook: Computer Programs for Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alexa, M., Zuell, C. Text Analysis Software: Commonalities, Differences and Limitations: The Results of a Review. Quality & Quantity 34, 299–321 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004740203542

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004740203542

Keywords

Navigation