Abstract
This paper argues for a subtle but important shift in the way we view content analysis which allows for the introduction of two new variants on this methodology. Previously, content analysis has been seen as a method for quantifying the content of texts. This paper argues that we should view content analysis as a method for counting interpretations of content. Based on this reconceptualization, this paper suggests two new varieties of content analysis. Reception based content analysis allows researchers to quantify how different audiences will understand text. Interpretive content analysis is specially designed for latent content analysis, in which researchers go beyond quantifying the most straightforward denotative elements in a text. These new forms of content analysis are contrasted with traditional content analysis, and the appropriate conditions for their use are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Arnold, S.J. and E. Fischer: 1994, ‘Hermeneutics and consumer research’, Journal of Consumer Research 21, pp. 55-70.
Babbie, E.R.: 1975, The Practice of Social Research (Wadsworth Publishing Co, Belmont, CA).
Belk, R.W.: 1991, ‘Epilogue: Lessons learned’, in R. Belk (ed.), Highways and Buyways: Naturalistic Research from the Consumer Behavior Odyssey (Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT), pp. 234–238.
Belk, R.W., M. Wallendorf and J.F. Sherry Jr.: 1989, ‘The sacred and the profane in consumer behavior: Theodicy or the odyssey’, Journal of Consumer Research 16, pp. 1–38.
Berelson, B.: 1952, Content Analysis in Communications Research (The Free Press, Glance, IL).
Berelson, B.: 1954, ‘Content analysis’, in G. Lindzey (ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology: Theory and Method, Vol. 1 (Addison-Wesley, Cambridge, MA), pp. 488–522.
Cohen, J.: 1960, ‘A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales’, Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, pp. 37–46.
Cohen, J.B.: 1989, ‘Counting advertising assertions to assess regulatory policy: When it doesn't add up’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 8, pp. 24–29.
Eco, U.: 1976, A Theory of Semiotics (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN).
Elliot, R., S. Eccles, and M. Hodgson: 1993, ‘Re-coding gender representations: Women, cleaning products, and advertising's ‘NewMan,''International Journal of Research in Marketing 10, pp. 311–324.
Ericsson, K.A. and H.A. Simon: 1984, Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data (The MIT Press, Cambridge,MA).
Feldman, M.S.: 1995, Strategies for interpreting Qualitative Data (SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA).
Ferguson, J.H., P.J. Kreshel and S.F. Tinkham: 1990, ‘In the pages of Ms.: Sex role portrayals of women in advertising’, Journal of Advertising 19, pp. 40–51.
Fiske, J.: 1982, Introduction to Communication Studies (Methuen, London).
Fowles, B.R. and V.M. Horner: 1975, ‘A suggested research strategy’, Journal of Communication 25, pp. 98–101.
Garfinkel, H.: 1967, Studies in Ethnomethodology (Polity, Cambridge,MA).
Gilly, M.C.: 1988, ‘Sex roles in advertising: A comparison of television advertisements in Australia,Mexico, and the United States’, Journal of Marketing 52, pp. 75–85.
Glaser, B.: 1978, Theoretical Sensitivity (Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA).
Holbrook, M.B.: 1977, ‘More on content analysis in consumer research’, Journal of Consumer Research 4, pp. 176–177.
Holsti, O.R.: 1968, ‘Content analysis’, in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2 (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA), pp. 596–692.
Holt, D.B.: 1991, ‘Rashomon visits consumer behavior: An interpretive critique of naturalistic inquiry’, in R. Holman and M. Solomon (eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18 (Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT), pp. 57–62.
Hoyer, W. and J. Jacoby: 1985, ‘Miscomprehension of public affairs programming’, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 29, pp. 437–443.
Jacoby, J., W. Hoyer and D. Sheluga: 1980, Miscomprehension of televised Communication (American Association of Advertising Agencies, New York).
Janis, I.L.: 1943, ‘Meaning and the study of symbolic behavior’, Psychiatry 6, pp. 425–439.
Janis, I.L.: 1965, ‘The problem of validating content analysis’, in H.D. Lasswell and N. Leites (eds.), Language of Politics (The MIT Press, Cambridge,MA).
Kaplan, A.: 1943, ‘Content analysis and the theory of signs’, Philosophy or Science 10, pp. 230–247.
Kassarjian, H.H.: 1977, ‘Content analysis in consumer research’, Journal of Consumer Research 4, pp. 8–18.
Kepplinger, H.M.: 1989, ‘Content analysis and reception analysis’, American Behavioral Scientist 33, pp. 175–182.
Kolbe, R.H. and M.S. Burnett: 1991, ‘Content-analysis research: An examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity’, Journal of Consumer Research 18, pp. 243–250.
Lasswell, H.D.: 1941, ‘The technique of symbol analysis (content analysis)’, Experimental Division, op. cit. As cited in Kaplan (1943).
Lincoln, Y.S. and E.G. Guba: 1985, Naturalistic Inquiry (Sage, Newbury Park, CA).
Matacin, M.L. and J.M. Burger: 1987, ‘A content analysis of sexual themes in playboy cartoons’, Sex Roles 17, pp. 179–186.
Mead, G.H.: 1934, Mind, Self, and Society (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL).
Mick, D.G. and C. Buhl: 1992, ‘A meaning-based model of advertising experiences’, Journal of Consumer Research 19, pp. 317–338.
Mick, D.G. and L.G. Politi: 1989, ‘Consumers’ interpretations of advertising imagery: A visit to the hell of connotation’, in E. Hirschman (ed.), Interpretive Consumer Research (Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT), pp. 85–96.
Miles, M.B. andM.A. Huberman: 1984, Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods (Sage, Newbury Park, CA).
Morris, C.: 1946, Signs, Language and Behavior (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
Perreault, W.D., Jr. and L.E. Leigh: 1989, ‘Reliability of nominal data based on qualitative judgments’, Journal of Marketing Research 26, pp. 135–148.
Pollay, R.W.: 1983, ‘Measuring the cultural values mManifest in advertising’, Current Issues and Research in Advertising 1, pp. 71–92.
Pollay, R.W.: 1989, ‘Filters, flavors flim-flam, too! On ‘Health information’ and policy implications in cigarette advertising’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 8, pp. 30–39.
Ringold, D.J. and J.E. Calfee: 1989, ‘The informational content of cigarette advertising: 1926–1986’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 8, pp. 1–23.
Ringold, D.J. and J.E. Calfee: 1990, ‘What can we learn from the informational content of cigarette advertising? A reply and further analysis’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 9, pp. 30–41.
Rust, R.T. and B. Cooil: 1994, ‘Reliability measures for qualitative data: Theory and implications’, Journal of Marketing Research 31, pp. 1–14.
Schroder, K.C.: 1994, ‘Audience semiotics, interpretive communities and the ‘ethnographic turn’ in media research’, Media, Culture and Society 16, pp. 337–347.
Scott, L.M.: 1994, ‘Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric’, Journal of Consumer Research 21, pp. 252–273.
Spiggle, S.: 1994, ‘Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research’, Journal of Consumer Research 21, pp. 491–503.
Stern, B.B.: 1993, ‘Feminist literary criticism and the deconstruction of ads: A postmodern view of advertising and consumer responses’, Journal of Consumer Research 19, pp. 556–566.
Strauss, A. and J. Corbin: 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research (Sage, Newbury Park, CA).
Thompson, C.: 1990, ‘Eureka! and other tests of significance: A new look at evaluating interpretive research’, in M. Goldberg et al. (eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17 (Association for Conumer Research, Provo, UT), pp. 25–30.
Thompson, C., W.B. Locander and H.R. Pollio: 1989, ‘Putting consumer experience back into consumer research: The philosophy and method of existentialphenomenology’, Journal of Consumer Research 16, pp. 133–146.
Thompson, C., H.R. Pollio and W.B. Locander: 1994, ‘The spoken and the unspoken: A hermeneutic approach to understanding the cultural viewpoints that underlie consumers’ expressed meanings’, Journal of Consumer Research 21, pp. 432–452.
Wallendorf, M. and E. Arnould: 1988, ‘'My favorite things': A cross-cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage’, Journal of Consumer Research 14, pp. 531–547.
Wallendorf, M. and R.W. Belk: 1989, ‘Assessing trustworthiness in consumer research’, in E. Hirschman (ed.), Interpretive Consumer Research (Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT), pp. 69–84.
Weber, R.P.: 1985, Basic Content Analysis (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA).
Zinkhan, G.M. and A. Shermohamad: 1986, ‘Is other-directedness on the increase? An empirical test of Riesman's Theory of social character’, Journal of Consumer Research 13, pp. 127–130.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ahuvia, A. Traditional, Interpretive, and Reception Based Content Analyses: Improving the Ability of Content Analysis to Address Issues of Pragmatic and Theoretical Concern. Social Indicators Research 54, 139–172 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011087813505
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011087813505