Atlas.ti 9 Review

Motivation to try Atlas.ti 9 and write this review

As a PhD student, I did not have money to pay for expensive coding software, so I often used R for Qualitative Data Analysis (RQDA). It required a lot of research and experimentation, but I eventually was able to use it to code hundreds of open-ended survey questions that I collected for a study looking into the types of racial/linguistic ideologies encountered by multiracial/multiethnic individuals. However, as an open software, RQDA has not been updated in a long time, often froze, and was still difficult to figure out how to use due to limited documentation. The documentation that was available seemed to be catered towards experts in R programming.

As a new professor who finally has (limited) research funds, I decided to try a paid computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS). However, I couldn’t find any reviews that could help me decide between popular ones such as Nvivo, Atlas.ti, and MAXQDA.

Hopefully this review can be helpful to others deciding between which CAQDS to choose.

What I was looking for in a CAQDAS

I needed a CAQDAS that could help me analyze hundreds of open-ended responses from surveys in addition to transcribed interviews. For me, the ability to quickly organize, find, and export code data in a tabular format was important.

My knowledge is limited to RQDA, Nvivo, and Atlas.ti

I only had a limited amount of time, so was only able to try out the trial version of Nvivo (for 14 days). The trial version of Atlas.ti 9 allows you only 5 days, but was able to use it for several months in exchange for writing this review. As I mentioned in the motivation section, I worked with R and RQDA for several years, so much of my review reflects my desire to have a CAQDAS that is compatible with R.

Some parts that are significantly (and crucially) better than R for QDA:

• ability to look up and select codes quickly during open coding/tagging process
• ability to export Excel spreadsheets of codes/descriptions, quotations from transcripts belonging to each code, coding frequencies for each document
• ability to work with opened-ended response survey data (although it takes some time to learn how to work with the data)
• ability to use Search & Code with text, regular expressions, or proper nouns/names in order to quickly find/code data with certain phrases
• ability to easily write memos/reflections throughout the coding process

Improvements over Nvivo (for me personally):

• does not slow down over time like Nvivo, especially on a Mac–very important
• the Support team is very quick to reply to questions –also a huge plus

Some demerits of Atlas.ti 9:

• The code list is in alphabetical order, but I wish there was the option to organize based on categories/subcategories/codes (similar to Nvivo). It is important for me to be able to have all the codes relevant to a specific group in one, easily selectable area because I use this when selecting data to analyze or export into Excel spreadsheets. Right now all the codes in the list are ordered alphabetically, so I can work around this by renaming each code to reflect a category (e.g., AGENCY: Cultural capitalaccording to cultural norms). However, the name gets long, so it gets harder to read the entire code name on Atlas.ti’s interface when recoding/recategorizing data.
  • Note: there is an ability to make “code groups,” but this did not make it easier to find the code I was looking for when tagging data.
• It would be nice if it had the ability to create sunburst and tree diagrams quickly (like Nvivo or R), but since I can export the data and create these diagrams with R it is not a deal-breaker for me.
• It is quite expensive, so only individuals with access to funding or have a lot of extra cash can access this resource. As a multiracial researcher cares a lot about promoting a diversity of voices in academic research, this troubles me. Academic institutions (especially in the U.S.) are overwhelmingly White and appeal to White epistemologies (Kubota, 2020), so it worries me when poorer institutions and academics (e.g., those in third world countries, nonWestern countries) are unable to access the same academic resources and materials as White dominant institutions. To be clear, this is not just a problem for Atlas.ti–this is a problem with academia and research in general (we need more open access to journals/articles/technology). However, Atlas.ti and other industries could help solve this issue by providing case-by-case pricing based on the institution, position, access to research funds, location, etc. I reached out to Atlas.ti and they were very supportive in negotiating with me (with my limited funding options at a nonWestern institution) to find a reasonable solution. Part of it involved having me write and publish this review, which I was happy to do.