#Cornell atlasti pro
#Cornell atlasti software
#Cornell atlasti mac

If I were to use DEVONthink for QDA, perhaps the annotation script approach by korm and Frederiko could be adapted as such a tool.

#Cornell atlasti software

There’s a variety of QDA software which hard-codes the researcher’s philosophy of his relation to the data. Perhaps some form of QDA may be useful in the strange universe of quantum physics. I’m a bit intrigued by the emphasis on the researcher’s philosophy in approaching data, which reminds me of the observational problem of determining the fate of Schrödinger’s cat. There are a number of methodologies, some of which, as I studied under Karl Popper, seem non-falsifiable to me. I’ve seen it used in development of a legal case through analysis of responses by a forum group to various presentations considered for use in a trial.īeyond such uses, QDA has been used in a variety of fields including psychology, sociology, philosophy, ethnic studies, literary analysis &c. QDA is often used as a tool to analyze behavior in focus groups used, e.g., to evaluate marketing potentials of a product. I’m somewhat familiar with qualitative analysis approaches.

The History view of a database (Tools > History) is a table of contents of the database. Choose the contextual menu option to create a table of contents. Select all of the documents and Control-click. To create a TOC of a selected group or multiple selected groups, in the Three Panes view document contained in the selection(s) will be listed. Please elaborate a little more on how you enable the TOC for groups, and history view of main database. Bottom line: because the two apps (DT and Atlas are overlapping in good measure this conversation is, in my view, justified.

#Cornell atlasti mac

But the Mac version does not have the whole range of features which the Windows version does. This means DT scripting is replaced by several innovative, inherent features in Atlas. Atlas.ti 7 for mac, for example, offers several features that overlap with DT, and some that surpass it. Hence I am comparing oranges with oranges. Under the main description of their website it is stated clearly that the purpose is for “qualitative research,” ( ) For this reason they now claim the ability to conduct qualitative research. There is room for disagreement here, since recently the two companies (Atlas/QRS International) have branched out and and are offering considerably improved versions of their product.

#Cornell atlasti pro

Please note that I can create a TOC for any group in my databases, and the History view of my Main database is a TOC of the more than 30,000 documents in that DEVONthink Pro Office thank you for your thoughts. It’s generally good practice to use software tools that are most appropriate to one’s needs. DEVONthink can share documents that are stored by different database software by Indexing them, so long as the documents are available via the Finder. Over the years, I’ve seen comments by some DEVONthink users who do QDA work using QDA software, but also use DEVONthink because it can be used for other purposes with their document collections. But if I were ever to take on a QDA project (which for me is highly unlikely), I would look for software appropriate to that purpose. I don’t do qualitative data analysis, and would find the environment of such special purpose software very weak for my needs. Quantitative Data Analysis (QDA) software is written to provide specific computational tools for quantitative data analysis of document collections.ĭEVONthink isn’t designed to do QDA, and for my purposes I would find QDA software not appropriate for my document management/information management/information analysis needs. There’s a lively Scripting section on our user forum. DEVONthink Pro and Pro Office are highly scriptable, and so many procedures can be automated or features extended by scripting. The DEVONthink applications are general purpose document management/information management software that can be used for many purposes and in many ways.

Such a conversation should begin by recognizing that the comparison is not apples to apples, but apples to oranges.