Academic Journal Article (Qualitative Research / Psychology). pp. 77–101.

After reading Braun and Clarke’s 2021 practical guide, I wanted to look back at their original paper to understand where their approach to thematic analysis began. The paper introduces thematic analysis as an accessible and flexible method for identifying and analysing patterns within qualitative data. Braun and Clarke also provide guidance for carrying it out carefully and consistently, rather than simply selecting interesting quotes from interviews.

Initial Reflections

What I found most useful is how suitable thematic analysis feels for the type of primary research I have collected. My interviews contain individual experiences and different levels of detail, so I need a method that allows me to recognise shared patterns without suggesting that every autistic participant experiences travel in exactly the same way.

The paper also reinforces that thematic analysis involves interpretation. I will need to make decisions about which parts of the data are important and how different responses connect to my research question.

Braun and Clarke outline six stages for carrying out thematic analysis:

1. Familiarise myself with the data

Read all of the responses carefully and make initial notes.

Label useful or meaningful parts of participants' responses.

Look for connections between different codes.

Check them against the original interview responses and change them where necessary.

Decide clearly what each theme represents.

Explain the themes, use participant quotes as evidence, and show how the findings connect to my research question.

The authors present this as a flexible process rather than something that must always happen perfectly in a straight line.

Looking Beyond Repeated Words

An important point is that thematic analysis is not simply about counting which words appear most often. A participant might describe an experience differently from another participant but still be expressing a similar underlying issue.

For example:

“I panic in security.”

“Security can be very overwhelming.”

“I need more time to process everything.”

These responses use different language, but during analysis they could potentially contribute to connected codes or themes around airport pressure, uncertainty or overwhelm. I should therefore analyse the meaning of the responses, rather than relying only on frequency.

Braun and Clarke also explain that thematic analysis can be approached in different ways depending on the research question and theoretical position. This means researchers need to be clear about the decisions they make when analysing data. For my project, I want to remain open to what participants actually tell me rather than beginning with predetermined themes such as security, sensory overload or navigation and forcing every response into them.

The 2006 paper is now an older source, so I will use it as the foundational methodology reference alongside Braun and Clarke’s more recent 2021 guidance, rather than treating it as the latest development of their approach.

Key Terminology

Code - a short label describing something meaningful within a participant response.

Theme - a wider pattern that connects several related pieces of data.

Semantic meaning - analysing what participants directly say.

Latent meaning - considering possible underlying ideas or assumptions within what participants say.

Thematic analysis - a method for identifying and interpreting patterns of meaning across qualitative data.