How to use the Qualitative Codebook Generator.
A codebook should define when a label applies and when it does not. Use sample excerpts to make coding decisions more consistent.
Make the workflow fit your task.
Build codes from the research question and sample excerpts, giving each a definition, inclusion rule, exclusion rule and example. Preserve overlapping or uncertain cases for discussion. Pilot the codebook on fresh excerpts and revise ambiguous boundaries before full coding.
- What you provide
- Anonymized interview excerpts and research objective.
- What you get
- Initial codes, definitions and inclusion rules.
See the input and the result.
Illustrative input and output · a teaching example, not a live WebAct run
Example input
Research question: what blocks first-time setup? Excerpts: P1 "I did not know what workspace meant." P2 "The guide never said where to upload the file."
Completed example
Code: terminology confusion Include: uncertainty about a term's meaning. Exclude: knowing the term but not finding a control. Example: P1, "I did not know what workspace meant." Code: missing instruction Include: an absent procedural step. Exclude: a supplied step that the participant misunderstood. Example: P2, "The guide never said where to upload the file." Pilot these boundaries on further excerpts before full coding.
Load this input into the prompt, then copy it to WebAct to try the task. Your result may differ from the illustration.
Decisions and troubleshooting.
Should one excerpt receive only one qualitative code?
That depends on the coding approach. Allow multiple codes when distinct meanings coexist and document the rule consistently.
Why do reviewers apply the same code to different kinds of evidence?
The definition or boundary may be too broad. Compare disputed excerpts and add explicit inclusion and exclusion examples.
Try it with your own source.
Replace the example with your material in the task prompt. Keep the requirements you need, then copy the task into WebAct.
Customize and copy the task ↑