Performing Qualitative Content Analysis of Video Data in Social Sciences and Medicine: The Visual-Verbal Video Analysis Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Videos are ubiquitous and have significantly impacted our communication and information consumption. The video, as data, has helped researchers understand how human interactions and relationships develop and change, and how patterns emerge in various circumstances and interpretations. Given the expanding relevance of video data in social science and medical research and the constant introduction of new formats and sources, it is critical to be able to conduct a thorough analysis of this multimodal data. However, the few methodologies (e.g., Actor Network Theory, Picture Theory) appropriate to video data analysis lack detailed guidelines on how to select, organize, and examine the multimodality of video data. This article aims to overcome this practice or methodological gap by proposing and demonstrating the Visual-Verbal Video Analysis (VVVA) method, a six-step framework adapted from Multimodal Theory and Visual Grounded Theory for organizing and evaluating video material according to the following dimensions: general characteristics of the video; multimodal characteristics; visual characteristics; characteristics of primary and secondary characters; and content and compositional characteristics including the transmission of messages, emotions, and discourses. This article also looks at the theories underlying video data analysis, focusing on Grounded Theory and Multimodality Theory, and provides multiple examples of coding and interpretive processes to deepen understanding and comprehension. The VVVA data extraction matrices provide a systematic coding approach for verbal, visual, and textual content, allowing for structured, coherent extraction that supports the discovery of patterns and links among disparate types of information. The VVVA method may be applied to a wide range of video data in social and medical sciences that vary in length and originate from different sources (e.g., open access web sources, pre-recorded organizational videos and recordings created for research purposes). The VVVA method effectively tracks the ongoing research process, and can manage data sets of various sizes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.049 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".