 |
| 1 | |
Content analysis and interaction analysis are similar in that each: |
| | A) | is a quantitative method. |
| | B) | uses some form of experimental research design. |
| | C) | is a method for analyzing content of interaction. |
| | D) | relies on participants' perceptions of communication. |
| | E) | a and c |
|
|
|
| 2 | |
In content analysis, manifest content and latent content refer to: |
| | A) | the content itself and interpretations about the content that imply something about the communicators. |
| | B) | the expected content and the actual content. |
| | C) | the macro content and the micro content. |
| | D) | naturally-occurring conversations and simulated conversations. |
| | E) | the interpretation of the content made by participants and the interpretation developed by the researcher. |
|
|
|
| 3 | |
The quantitative aspect of content analysis is the: |
| | A) | the number of participants who produce the content to be coded. |
| | B) | the frequency counts for each coded element. |
| | C) | the number of categories the content reveal. |
| | D) | the number of coders who code the content. |
|
|
|
| 4 | |
Content analysis is conducted on texts or messages that are: |
| | A) | captured in writing. |
| | B) | captured on audiotape. |
| | C) | captured on videotape. |
| | D) | spoken; the researcher codes the content in real-time. |
| | E) | All but d. |
|
|
|
| 5 | |
In content analysis, it is common to see coding schemes with one category identified as "other." This category indicates that a: |
| | A) | successful coding scheme was developed; everything but one type of response was coded. |
| | B) | successful coding scheme was developed; "other" is typically a theoretically-grounded category. |
| | C) | successful coding scheme was developed; the "other" category is used as a comparison to the identified categories. |
| | D) | successful coding scheme was developed; items in this category will be separately analyzed. |
| | E) | coding scheme was not successfully developed; the coding scheme is not as developed as it could be. |
|
|
|
| 6 | |
In content coding, a unit of analysis may be: |
| | A) | words or phrases. |
| | B) | complete thoughts or sentences. |
| | C) | themes. |
| | D) | communication acts, behaviors, or processes. |
| | E) | all of the above. |
|
|
|
| 7 | |
Using interaction analysis, a researcher codes: |
| | A) | messages or texts into theoretically-based categories. |
| | B) | ongoing conversation. |
| | C) | verbal and/or nonverbal features or functions of conversation. |
| | D) | all of the above. |
|
|
|
| 8 | |
One of the primary strengths of interaction analysis is that: |
| | A) | coders do not need to be trained on the coding scheme before coding data. |
| | B) | one coder is sufficient. |
| | C) | elements preceding and subsequent to the element being coded are considered in placing conversational elements into categories. |
| | D) | it is easy to develop and validate an interaction analysis coding scheme. |
| | E) | it is always easy to distinguish units of analysis. |
|
|
|
| 9 | |
In content analysis, validity refers to: |
| | A) | a measure of interrater reliability for categorical data. |
| | B) | trends, patterns, and structures of communication phenomena reflected in the data. |
| | C) | the appropriateness and adequacy of the coding scheme for the text or messages being coded. |
| | D) | whether or not unitizing reliability for coding decisions is high. |
| | E) | interrater agreement. |
|
|
|
| 10 | |
Training coders involves which of the following: |
| | A) | committing the coding scheme to paper. |
| | B) | preparing a codebook to identify coding content, coding units, and rules for coding. |
| | C) | practicing on text or messages similar to those that must be coded. |
| | D) | a simple discussion of the coding categories. |
| | E) | all of the above |
| | F) | all but d |
|
|
.