Create a network tool

[Emugaia]

Problem

I'm having difficulties organizing ideas that come up while manipulating data in the software, especially when trying to create semantic relationships in inductive procedures. I can't find enough tools to establish relationships between the project's components. For example, I would like to be able to establish connections between text segments (not just through coding), between text files, between codes and text files, etc. This type of operation is crucial in conducting inductive research, grounded theory, and literature reviews, among others.

Solution
I believe it would be very useful to expand the functions of the recently added code organizer. The goal would be to have a flexible graphical work environment that facilitates the visualization of all project components (citations, memos, text files, videos, images, etc.) and allows for establishing semantic relationships between them, not just between codes and categories. This feature would be very useful for identifying emerging relationships in the data and for providing tools to diagram them.
It would be very interesting if the relationships (represented by connection lines) could also be edited depending on their nature (causality, inclusion, contradiction, etc.), and if explanatory notes could be added. Changes made in the graphical interface could automatically reflect in other software menus. For example, when opening a text segment, there could be a symbol indicating its relationship with another segment, memo, etc., in addition to its relationship with a code.

Additional context
An example of this type of function is the network feature in Atlas.ti

[ccbogel]

@Emugaia thank you for the idea. There is already a graphical environment that goes partly toward what you are wanting. I wanted to mention it now, in case you were not aware of it:
In the menu: Reports > View Graph
You can create a graph (in computing terms a graph is a collection of nodes linked by lines).
Graphs can be saved and loaded, and printed to png files.
Let me know if you have looked at this.

[Emugaia]

Hi, thanks for keeping the conversation going. I've been experimenting with the graph and I think it's heading in the direction of what was suggested. However, I'd like to use this graph not just to generate a project representation, but as a working environment from the beginning and at any time, allowing the project's structure to be altered as needed. Although the graph allows for establishing relationships between components, it doesn't let me edit the type of relationship (such as causality, contradiction, complementarity, belonging, etc.), which would be extremely useful.
It would be beneficial if the relationships between all components (not just between codes and categories) could be conceived as a "tree," where any changes in the relationships would organically affect the project's structure. Additionally, it would be very useful if this graphical environment could generate text-based reports, allowing the selection of components and relationships according to the researcher's needs.

[ccbogel]

OK there is a few things here to get my head around. I might be able to gradually introduce some of these.
I will start with this one:
1 Establishing relationships between components (Using view graph, initially), it doesn't let me edit the type of relationship (such as causality, contradiction, complementarity, belonging.

• These relationships are named 'causality' etc - i.e. when adding the line between a code and a text passage. And similarly, between a code and category?

2 This sound a bit too difficult for me for now: "It would be beneficial if the relationships between all components (not just between codes and categories) could be conceived as a "tree," where any changes in the relationships would organically affect the project's structure"

3 text-based reports from graph environment, selecting components and relationships . I think I get it. perhaps give an example

[bozo32]

I'm currently using Atlas.ti to teach Toulmin style argument analysis because it supports the creation of arbitrary edges between nodes (quotations with no codes). Atlas.ti does not support output in argdown...which is a real pain, nor does it support any analysis of network integrity, it does not permit the creation of edges that link to edges (as a moderator in a causal relationship or a warrant in Toulmin style argument analysis)...and the networks it creates are horrible.

This same sort of arbitrary relationships between quotations (again, semantic units that are identified as analytically interesting but not coded) is useful for research that is nibbling at model specification, fuzzy cognitive mapping or any other sort of inquiry that is interested more in relationships between quotations (e.g. linguistic etc) than it is in the taxonomic classification of semantic units (whatever they are).

In Atlas, these edges may be created by dragging and dropping quotation markers on each other or in network view.

This ability to create graphs linking uncoded quotations is the only reason why I'm continuing to teach with Atlas.ti