Potentialities of the Qualitative Analysis Assisted by Computer: An Exploratory Study About Content Value Perception in TripAdvisor

  • Carolina AfonsoEmail author
  • Rui Brites
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 621)


This study explores the potentialities of the qualitative analysis assisted by computer. The study is exploratory and focus the perception of the functional value of the content created and shared by TripAdvisor users. Data were collected through online interviews. The study sample consists of 85 respondents. Through content analysis performed using MaxQDA, eleven categories were related to functional value. The most frequent category is “advice on restaurants, places to visit, etc.”, followed by “real testimonials” and content on “value for money”. Through Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) using SPSS, three strong associations among the categories are identified: “actual testimonies”, “information about the destination” and “useful in choosing the destination”; between the categories “Advice on restaurants and places to visit” and “experiences in restaurants”; and an association between “Quality/Price” and “Hotel Information”. The articulation between the two techniques proved adequate and allowed a rewarding analysis and interpretation of the data.


Content analysis Multiple correspondence analysis Functional value User-Generated content 



We gratefully acknowledge the financial support from FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (Portugal), national funding through research grant (UID/SOC/04521/2013).


  1. 1.
    Bardin, L.: Análise de conteúdo. Edições 70, Lisboa (1977)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baxter, L.A.:. Content analysis. In: Montgomery, B.M., Duck, S. (eds.) Studying Interpersonal Interaction, pp. 239–254. The Guilford Press, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berelson, B.: Content analysis in communication research. Free Press, Glencoe (1952)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biggs, J.: Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Open University Press, Philadelphia (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carvalho, H.: Análise Multivariada de Dados Qualitativos, p. 13. Edições Sílabo, Lisboa (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carson, D., Coviello, N.: Qualitative research issues at the marketing/entrepreneurship interface. Mark. Intell. Plann. 14(6), 51–58 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheong, H., Morrison, M.: Consumers’ reliance on product information and recommendations found in UGC. J. Interact. Advert. 8(2), 38–49 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clemente, M.R., Vieira, R., Martins, F., Andrade, A.I.: Linguistic diversity in Aveiro, Portugal: Exploring linguistic landscape methodologies in the «Beira Mar» neighborhood. Int. Late. Corp. J. 3(1), 116–133 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cole, F.L.: Content analysis: process and application. Clin. Nurse Spec. 2(1), 53–57 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Constantinides, E.: Social media/web 2.0 as marketing parameter: an introduction. In: Proceedings of 8th International Congress Marketing, pp. 1–25 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Constantinides, E., Fountain, S.: Web 2.0: Conceptual foundations and marketing issues. J. Direct, Data Digital Mark. Pract. 9(3), 231–244 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Costa, A.P., Loureiro, M.J., Reis, L.P., Neri de Souza, F.: Análise de Interações Focada na Colaboração e Cooperação do Modelo 4C. Revista Lusófona de Educação 29, 19–39 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Downe-Wamboldt, B.: Content analysis: method, applications and issues. Health Care Women Int. 13, 313–321 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Edelman, D.: Branding in the digital age. Harvard Bus. Rev. 88(12), 62–69 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Elo, S., Kynga, E., Kyngas, H.: The qualitative content analysis process. J. Adv. Nurs. 62(1), 107–115 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Filieri, R., Alguezaui, S., McLeay, F.: Why do travelers trust TripAdvisor? Antecedents of trust towards consumer-generated media and its influence on recommendation adoption and word of mouth. Tour. Manag. 51, 174–185 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ganzaroli, A., De Noni, I., van Baalen, P.: Vicious advice: analyzing the impact of TripAdvisor on the quality of restaurants as part of the cultural heritage of Venice. Tour. Manag. 61, 501–510 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldsmith, R., Horowitz, D.: Measuring motivations for online opinion seeking. J. Int. Adv. 6(2), 2–14 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Google Consumer barometer.
  20. 20.
    Graneheim, U.H., Lundman, B.: Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ. Today 24, 105–112 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim, C., Jin, M., Kim, J., Shin, N.: User perception of the quality, value, and utility of user-generated content. J. Elec. Comm. Rese 13(4), 305–319 (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krippendorff, K.: Content Analysis. An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage, Berverly Hills (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kyngas, H., Vanhanen, L.: Content analysis (Finnish). Hoitotiede 11, 3–12 (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    O’Reilly, T., Battelle, J.: Web squared : web 2.0 five years on.
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
    Sandelowski, M.: Qualitative analysis: what it is and how to begin? Res. Nurs. Health 18, 371–375 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sheth, J., Newman, B., Gross, B.: Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values. J. Bus. Rese. 22(2), 159–170 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Smith, D., Menon, S., Sivakumar, K.: Online peer and editorial recommendations, trust and choice in virtual markets. J. Int. Mark. 19(3), 15–37 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ISEG (Lisbon School of Economics and Management)Universidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations