Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Abstract 


Generative artificial intelligence (AI) applications are becoming increasingly influential in psychology training, practice, and research. In this study, the procedures (e.g., coding process) and products (e.g., codes; themes; core story) of qualitative content analysis (QCA) conducted by Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT)-4 and novice human researchers were compared, and advantages and disadvantages of each approach were considered. Data included open-ended survey responses from trainers (N = 60) in school psychology programs regarding assessment practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings indicated that ChatGPT-4 could conduct QCA with products that were similar, overall, to human coders, and in significantly less time. However, ChatGPT-4’s process was not transparent, and some codes and themes were unclear. Meanwhile, human coding allowed for the selection and implementation of a purposeful methodological approach, and an auditable and systematic process resulting in a coherent narrative. Considerations for the use of AI in qualitative research are considered and discussed, and future research directions are provided.

Citations & impact 


This article has not been cited yet.

Impact metrics

Alternative metrics

Altmetric item for https://www.altmetric.com/details/170217994
Altmetric
Discover the attention surrounding your research
https://www.altmetric.com/details/170217994