Read and analyse the qualitative coding that the Zotero plugins zotQDA and qdaZ export.
Primarily the analysis half of the zotQDA ecosystem
— that is where the full range is available. It also reads
REFI-QDA (.qdpx) projects, so a study kept
in MAXQDA, ATLAS.ti, NVivo, QDA Miner or Dedoose can borrow the metrics
those programs do not document: confidence intervals on every agreement
coefficient, the kappa paradox diagnostics, the reliability of the
segmentation itself, saturation as a reportable number, and sample-size
planning. A .qdpx supports a subset, reported on
import.
library(qdaR)
frag <- qda_read_fragments(qda_example("zotqda-fragments.csv"))
qda_plot_frequencies(frag)Full documentation, including a section for anyone wanting to extend the package: https://qdar.zotqda.org/
Reads the exchange files and checks them. Every file
zotQDA writes carries a stamp in its first column that says what kind of
export it is and which version of the exchange format it uses.
qdaR compares that stamp against the contract file both
sides ship (qda_contract()). A file that claims a newer
version than this package knows stops with an error instead of being
guessed at.
Reproduces the plugin’s figures with ggplot2, frequencies, code by document, coding progress, saturation, and can re-render the original Vega-Lite charts unchanged when vegawidget is installed.
Adds the statistics the plugins leave out on purpose. qdaZ sticks to description and never runs a significance test, because a test invites claims that many qualitative designs cannot carry. If your design does support one, this is where you run it, and you pick it yourself:
| Function | Question |
|---|---|
qda_chisq() |
Are codes distributed independently of a grouping variable? With Cramer’s V, and an exact test when the expected counts are too small – Fisher’s for a two-by-two table, a seeded Monte Carlo p-value for anything larger. |
qda_ca() |
Which codes and documents attract each other, and how much of the table’s inertia am I actually seeing? The share is relative to the whole table, so keeping two of four dimensions does not report 100 percent. |
qda_mds(), qda_plot_mds() |
A map of codes by the segments they share. |
qda_cluster() |
Groups of codes — with the cophenetic correlation, because a dendrogram always looks convincing. |
Recomputes the reliability figures independently.
Percentage agreement, Cohen’s and Fleiss’ kappa, Brennan and Prediger’s
kappa, Krippendorff’s alpha and Gwet’s AC1 – computed here in R, from
the exported file alone. Because the plugin computes the same
coefficients in JavaScript, a figure that ends up in a methods section
has been produced twice by two code bases that share nothing but the
contract; the test suite checks the two against each other on randomly
generated coder matrices. qda_level_agreement()
additionally shows where in the code system the agreement is
lost, by flattening the paths level by level.
Carries code identity through. Codes get renamed,
moved and merged while a project matures. Every export therefore names
each code twice: code holds the path a person reads,
codeId a stable identifier that stays put through all of
that. If your analysis groups by the path, a code vanishes from it as
soon as somebody renames or moves that code in Zotero. Grouping by
codeId survives such housekeeping.
# install.packages("remotes")
remotes::install_github("fre-ms/qdaR")qdaPy is the same tool written for Python. It reads the same files, computes the same coefficients and draws the same figures, over there with plotnine and seaborn. A shared set of frozen fixtures keeps both packages honest: every release gets checked against the plugin’s results and against the other package. Two genuine bugs in this very package turned up exactly that way.
AGPL-3.0-or-later, the same terms as zotQDA, qdaZ
and the Python twin qdaPy. (The CRAN package records the plain
AGPL-3; the AGPL text ships with R itself.)
What you produce with qdaR is yours. Figures, data
frames, coefficients, reports: the licence places no condition on any of
it, by an additional permission under section 7 of the AGPL, written
down in LICENSE-EXCEPTION.md
— the same wording as in the sibling projects. Strictly speaking it
changes nothing, a copyleft licence has never reached into a program’s
output, but a figure in a submitted manuscript is not the place for a
licensing question, so it is written down.
Commercial use does not need a commercial licence. The AGPL does not forbid it. What it asks is that a modified version you distribute, or let others use over a network, comes with its source. That is the only condition, and it holds for everyone: qdaR is not dual-licensed, and no proprietary exception is for sale.
Contributions are welcome and nothing has to be signed. There is no contributor licence agreement, because there is no second licence that would need one. You contribute under the AGPL and keep your copyright.