↓ Skip to main content

Large Language Models in Qualitative Analysis: Comparing Traditional and Researcher-Interpreted Approaches

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Qualitative Methods, February 2026
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users
bluesky
2 Bluesky users

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Large Language Models in Qualitative Analysis: Comparing Traditional and Researcher-Interpreted Approaches
Published in
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, February 2026
DOI 10.1177/16094069261426100
Authors

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 3 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 57%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 2 9%
Psychology 2 9%
Philosophy 1 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 12 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 October 2026.
All research outputs
#3,650,788
of 34,515,982 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Qualitative Methods
#172
of 1,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,015
of 357,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Qualitative Methods
#2
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,515,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.