Narrative analysis is analysis of a chronologically told story, with a focus on how elements are sequenced, why some elements are evaluated differently from others, how the past shapes perceptions of the present, how the present shapes perceptions of the past, and how both shape perceptions of the future. Narrative analysis is seen as a more in-depth alternative to survey research using psychological scales. Some advocates see it as an "empowering" social science methodology insofar as it gives respondents the venue to articulate their own viewpoints and evaluative standards.

Note, however, a different branch of narrative analysis is quantitative and uses non-metric multidimensional scaling, such as smallest space analysis. See also: content analysis.

Key Concepts and Terms

• Scripts are the referential core of personal narratives (Labov and Waletzky, 1967) or the "canonical events" (Bruner, 1990) used as a basis for understanding new, unexpected elements. That is, scripts are predictive frames by which a culture interprets particular instances of behavior associated with that script. Scripts do not require an evaluative component.

• Stories expand on generalized scripts by incorporating particularistic (non-canonical) events, adding evaluative elements which reveal the narrator's viewpoint regarding these particulars. Thus stories will evaluate a script as good, bad, successful, tragic, surprising, and so on.
  • The life story method of narrative analysis involves interviewing a subject and then retelling their story as if written by them (Reissman, 1993).

  • Metaphors may be identified, by which subjects organize their stories. Different metaphors throw light on new meanings in the stories being told.

• Interviews as discursive acts. Narratives are gathered through interviewing, which is understood as a discursive act (Mishler, 1986) in which the interviewer and the respondent "are engaged in creating the meaning of the questions and answers that constitute the narrative as they negotiate understanding through language" (Alvarez & Urla, 2002: 40 ). The interviewer and respondent joint create the narrative framework.

• Patterns are recurring forms of patter which are discerned in narrative transcripts. Polkinghome (1988: 153) notes that during interviews “people strive to organize their temporal experience into meaningful wholes and to use the narrative form as a pattern for uniting the events of their lives.”

• Themes are sets of patterns. There is no agreed-upon methodology in narrative analysis to derive themes from patterns. One practice, however, is to use a research team, with "themes" being whatever the team reaches consenses on, based on discussion of transcripts and analysis of patter and patterns. Labov (1972) encourages researchers to look for sequences of core phrases which are repeated across interviews as indicators of themes.

• Coding. As in content analysis, after transcription, narratives may be coded according to categories deemed theoretically important by the researcher. This labeling of the narrative structure might, for instance, use a set of structural/functional categories to label each segment as an AB= Abstract statement segment, OR= Orientation segment, CA= complicating action, EV= evaluation, RE= resolution, or CO= coda. Many, many coding schemas are possible.

• Temporal organization of the narrative. Frequently the researcher finds it helpful to organize the narrative according to temporal sequence (see Labov, 1997). Some researchers add subscripts to clauses in the narrative, with a left subscript indicating how many anteceding narrative clauses the given clause is simultaneous with, and a right subscript indicating how many following clauses the given clause is simultaneous with. Inter-rater reliability in temporally organizing the narrative is important as changes in temporal organization can radically shift the meaning of the narrative. The work of Labov (1972, 1982, 1997; see also Labov & Waletsky, 1967) pioneered narrative analysis as a primarily chronological self-account of past events.
  • Plot lines may be analyzed between subjects to determine common and divergent elements. Points where expected plot lines are disrupted illuminate the perceptions of that subject or group of subjects (Burck, 2005). The focus on plot represents a more recent emphasis in narrative analysis, associated with Reissman (1993), for whom stories are narratives wtih a beginning, with protagonists, and with a culminating event, though Reissman acknowledges narratives may lack culminative events ("habitual narratives") and may even relate events which might have happened but did not ("hypothetical narratives").

• Contextual analysis. As noted by Labov and Waletzky (1967), narratives, and particularly the evaluative elements of narratives, are a social phenomena. As a social phenomena, narratives vary by social context (home, school, work, etc.) and evaluative data extracted from narratives will vary by the social context within which they are collected. Consequently, it may be fruitful to gather narratives on the same reference objects from otherwise similar respondents in varying social contexts. Likewise, gathering narratives on the same objects from the same respondents at different points in some development process (ex., different career points) will yield differences in evaluative components and consequent insight into the process.

• Focus groups. Though not integral to narrative analysis, researchers such as Labov (1997) have found that "the most important data ... gathered on narrative is not drawn from the observation of speech production or controlled experiments, but from the reactions of audiences to the narratives." Thus the exposure of focus groups to narratives and the comparison of reactions among groups of different composition can be a method of further extending the anecdotal richness of the narrative method.
  • Retelling narratives. A particular technique further extending group reactions to narratives is to ask various types of respondents to memorize a short narrative (ex,, 12 - 20 lines) and then retell it. The researcher notes omissions and improvisations, which further illuminate how various types of respondents react to given types of narratives. Retelling, when there is a progressively increased time lapse between exposure and retelling, is also used to rank the perceived centrality of narrative elements: most central elements are retained longest.

• Facet theory. Facet theory methodology (see Shye and Elizur, 1994; Borg and Shye, 1995) developed by Louis Guttman (1968) may be used in narrative analysis (McAdams, 1993). Facet theory includes non-metric multidimensional scaling procedures, such as smallest space analysis (SSA), partial-order scalogram analysis (POSA), and multiple scaling analysis (MSA). These techniques have been popular in psychology, intelligence testing, and criminal analysis. See Canter, Kaouri, & Ioannou (2003) for an application to criminal analysis. See also the reading list on facet theory maintained by Prof. Canter.

  • Facets refer to categories in a conceptual spatial diagram partitioned based on prior theory. Some researchers use exploratory factor analysis to assign survey items to facets, which correspond to factors, but then use SSA as a confirmatory procedure. Shye (1991, 1994) has developed software, Faceted Smallest Space Analysis (FSSA), to map and mathematically partition conceptual maps. Specifically, FSSA produces a spatial map with each item located in a position which reflects its strength of relation with all other items. For the items associated with each facet, FSSA attempts to partition conceptual space in three ways: with parallel lines, with radial lines, and with concentric circles. FSSA also produces a separation index which varies from 0 to 1 and is used as a goodness-of-fit measure for the partitioning.

Assumptions

• Subjectivity. By giving totally free rein to subjective story-telling the narrative analyst taps a rich vein of anecdotal information at the expense of all the usual social scientific considerations (representative sampling, operationalization of terms, use of controls, multivariate causal analysis). As Labov (1997) notes, "The discussion of narrative and other speech events at the discourse level rarely allows us to prove anything. It is essentially a hermeneutic study, where continual engagement with the discourse as it was delivered gains entrance to the perspective of the speaker and the audience, tracing the transfer of information and experience in a way that deepens our own understandings of what language and social life are all about."

Frequently Asked Questions

• For what is narrative analysis useful?
  Narrative analysis is best used for exploratory purposes, sensitizing the researcher, illustrating but not by itself validating theory. A common focus is the exploration of ethical, moral, and cultural ambiguities. As one illustration, Alvarez and Urla (2002) argue that in the field of information systems implementation, narrative analysis provides richer data than is obtained by conventional sytems requirements analysis: "This paper argues that interview-generated narratives are representational forms that provide valuable data about work practices and individual worker perspectives, as well as the larger organizational political and cultural contexts that, for the most part, have been excluded from requirements determinations" (p. 40).

• What are examples of the use of narrative analysis in public administration?
  • Richard J. Herzog and Ronald G. Claunch (1997). "Stories citizens tell and how administrators use types of knowledge." Public Administration Review, Vol. 57, No. 5 (Sept./Oct.): 374-379.
  • Hummel, Ralph (1991). Stories managers tell: Why they are as valid as science." Public Administration Review, Vol. 51, No. 1 (Jan./Feb.): 31-34.

• What are some other recent examples of narrative analysis?
  • Bochner, Arthur P. (1997). It's about time: Narrative and the divided self. Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 3, No. 4 (December): 418-438. This is a narrative analysis about social research methodology.
  • Ellis, C. and A. Bochner (1992). Telling and performing personal stories: The constraints of choice in abortion. Pp. 79-101 in C. Ellis and M. Flaherty, eds., Investigating subjectivity: Research on lived experience. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Bibliography

• Alvarez, Rosario & Urla, Jaqueline (2002). Tell me a good story: Using narrative analysis to examine information requirements interviews during the ERP implementation. The Database for Advances in Information Systems 33(1), 38-52.
• Atkinson, Robert (1998). The life story interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Barthes, R. (1966). Introduction to the structural analysis of narratives. In Sontag, S. (eds.) A Barthes Reader, Vintage, 1993.
• Borg, I., and S. Shye (1995). Facet theory: Form and content. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Burck, Charlotte (2005). Comparing qualitative research methodologies for systemic research: The use pf grounded theory, discourse analysis and narrative analysis. Journal of Family Therapy 27(3): 237-262.
• Canter, D., Kaouri, C., Ioannou, M. (2003). The facet structure of criminal narratives. Pp. 27-38 in S Levy & D Elizur, eds. Facet theory: Towards cumulative social science. Ljubljana: Center for Educational Development.
• Cortazzi, M. (1999). Narrative analysis. Ch. 23 in Alan Bryman and Robert Burgess, eds., Methods of qualitative research, Viol. II. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Czarniawska, Barbara (1997). A narrative approach to organization studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Contains illustrations as well as explanation of the approach.
• Daiute, Colette and Cynthia Lightfoot, eds. (2004). Narrative analysis: Studying the development of individuals in society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Interdisciplinary collection.
• Dancer, L.S. (1990). Introduction to facet theory and its application. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 39: 365-377.
• Elliott, Jane (2005). Using narrative in social research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Intro text.
• Guttman, Louis A. (1968). A general nonmetric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points. Psychometrika, 3: 469-506.
• Josselson, R. and A. Lieblich (series of volumes, starting in 1993). Interpreting experience: The narrative study of lives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Kreps, G. L. (1994). Gender differences in the critical incidences reported by elderly health care residents: A narrative analysis. Pp. 27-34 in H. Sterk & L. Turner, eds. Differences that make a difference: Examining the assumptions of research in communication, language, and gender. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.
• Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. Pp. 354--396 in William Labov, ed., Language in the inner city: Studies in Black English vernacular. Philadelphia, PA: University of Philadelphia Press.
• Labov, W. (1982). Speech actions and reactions in personal narrative. In D. Tannen, ed., Analyzing discourse: Text and talk. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• Labov, William (1997). Some further steps in narrative analysis. The Journal of Narrative and Life History. Available online at http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~labov/sfs.html.
• Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. Pp. 12-44 in J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the verbal and visual arts. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. Classic work focused on the importance of evaluative statements in first-person narratives. Available online at http://www.clarku.edu/~mbamberg/Labov&Waletzky.htm.
• Lieblich, Amia, Rivka Tuval-Mashiach, and Tamar Zilber (1998). Narrative research Reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Focus on classification of written life-story materials and their analysis, which they divide into holistic-content, holistic-form, categorical-content, and categorical-form types of reading.
• Linde, C. (1993). Life stories: The creation of coherence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• McAdams, Daniel P. (1988). Power, intimacy, and the life story : Personological inquiries into identity. Guilford Press. A well-received earlier work than the author's 1993 best-seller.
• McAdams, Daniel P. (1993). The stories we live by : Personal myths and the making of the self. NY: William C. Morrow and Co. McAdams has had an impact in psychology through his argument that personal understanding must transcend objective data and examine the myths people create about their lives. This is a seminal work for the emerging field of narrative psychology.
• Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Patterson, Molly and Kristen Renwick Monroe (1998). Narrative in political science. The Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 1, 1998. Introduction to narrative analysis with emphasis on study of the role of culture and the role of narrative in the construction of social theory.
• Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
• Riesman, Catherine K. (1993). Narrative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Prize-winning textbook on the subject.
• Riessman, Catherine K. (2001). Analysis of personal narratives. Pp. 695-710 in J. F. Gurbium & J. A. Holstein, eds., Handbook of Interview Research. London: Sage Publications.
• Shye, S. (1985). Partial order scalogram analysis. In S. Shye, ed. Theory construction and data analysis in the behavioural sciences. San Francisco: Jossey Bass: 60-70.
• Shye, S. (1992). Faceted small space analysis. DOS computer program version 3.01. Jerusalem: Israel Institute for Applied Social Research.
• Shye, S., and D. Elizur, D., with M. Hoffman (1994). Introduction to facet theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.