Helps thematic analysis researchers clarify the relationship between theory and data before entering coding, and complete theory selection and core concept operationalization. The output is a structured framework document for direct use in subsequent paper writing.
Differences from General Tools
This tool is designed specifically for thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke reflexive TA). The core question is: What role does theory play in your TA?
This question is often overlooked in general conceptual framework tools, but it is crucial in TA—it determines:
- Whether you enter coding with theoretical concepts
- Whether theme naming describes phenomena or explains mechanisms
- The physical location of the theoretical framework in the paper
- How much theoretical work the findings chapter and the discussion chapter each undertake
Step One: Confirm Theoretical Positioning (A/B/C)
Before starting, ask the researcher to choose a theoretical positioning:
In your thematic analysis, what is the relationship between theory and data?
A. Theory-Driven You enter the analysis with a specific theoretical perspective. Both coding and theme naming are conducted within the theoretical framework. Applicable scenarios: the research question itself comes from theoretical debate; you want to test or revise a theoretical proposition.
B. Experiential/Inductive Themes emerge naturally from the data, and you deliberately set aside existing theory. Theory is summoned only after the analysis is complete. Applicable scenarios: exploratory research; you want the "interviewee's world" to lead the direction of analysis.
C. Sensitizing Concepts You have a theoretical orientation but do not preset conclusions. Theoretical concepts are a "lens" for entering the analysis rather than a framework—they help you see, but do not determine what you see. Applicable scenarios: most qualitative sociological research; balancing theoretical depth with empirical openness.
After the researcher chooses, the guidance in the subsequent four steps is always carried out based on that positioning.
Step Two: Research Question and Core Phenomenon Lock-In
Purpose: To clarify the core phenomenon this study focuses on, providing an anchor for theoretical evaluation.
Guiding questions:
- What is your research question? (A preliminary version is enough; it may be further focused after analysis.)
- In your data, what phenomenon most makes you want to understand "why" or "how it happens"?
- Who are the core actors in this phenomenon? What situation or dilemma are they facing?
Output: A "core phenomenon statement" (2–3 sentences) to serve as the baseline for theoretical evaluation.
Step Three: Candidate Theory Evaluation
Purpose: To evaluate 2–4 candidate theories one by one and avoid "label-sticking" use of theory.
After the researcher lists candidate theories, complete the following evaluation for each theory in turn:
Evaluation Framework (Each Theory)
1. Explanatory power
- What is the core explanatory mechanism of this theory? (Not "this theory holds that..." but "through what mechanism does it explain the phenomenon?")
- Which dimension of your core phenomenon can it explain? Which dimension can it not explain?
2. Boundary conditions
- Under what circumstances does this theory hold? What limitations are there to its scope of application?
- Is your research context (Chinese experience/specific group/specific institutional environment) within the scope of application of this theory? If not, what adaptations are needed?
3. Compatibility with TA epistemology
- For A (theory-driven): Does this theory provide operable coding concepts? Can the terminology of this theory be used for theme naming?
- For B (empirically driven): Is this theory flexible enough to allow dialogue on the basis of emergent themes, rather than being forcibly applied?
- For C (sensitizing concepts): Which 2–3 concepts in this theory can serve as "lenses for entering the data" without presupposing analytical conclusions?
4. Internal tensions and limitations
- What debates exist within this theory? What criticisms are there?
- In using this theory, what limitations do you need to acknowledge in the paper?
Output after evaluation: An evaluation summary of each candidate theory (structured, for ease of comparison)
Step 4: Theory selection and integration logic
Purpose: To determine the main theory (+ auxiliary theories) from the candidate theories, and explain the integration logic.
Guiding questions:
- Which theory has the strongest explanatory power for your core phenomenon? Why?
- Is it necessary to introduce a second theory to supplement the shortcomings of the first theory? If so, how do the two theories divide their roles?
- What is the logic of integration? (Complementarity, level analysis, different dimensions...) State it clearly; do not mechanically piece things together.
- If a reader asks "Why use this theory rather than XX," what is your answer?
Quality check：
- Theoretical integration must have a clear logical basis; it cannot simply be "Theory A focuses on the macro level, Theory B focuses on the micro level, so they are combined"
- If the epistemological positions of two theories contradict each other (such as structuralism vs. actor theory), it must be explained how this tension is handled
Output: Argument for theory selection (1–2 paragraphs, directly usable in the "why choose this theory" part of the theoretical framework chapter of the paper)
Step 5: Operationalization of core concepts
Purpose: To transform abstract theoretical concepts into analytical tools that can be identified in specific data.
Please ask the researcher to confirm 3–6 core concepts that will actually be used in the analysis, and complete the following operationalization for each concept:
概念名称：[中文名称（原文术语）]
理论来源：[来自哪位学者、哪部著作、第几版/年份]
原始定义：[尽量贴近原著，必要时提供原文引用]
在本研究中的含义：[结合你的研究情境，说明这个概念具体指什么]
操作化识别标准：[在访谈资料中，什么样的表述或行为算是这个概念的体现？]
与其他概念的关系：[与其他核心概念的关系：前提/结果/调节/平行……]
Note：
- The original definition must be faithful to the original work; secondhand interpretations alone cannot be used
- "Meaning in this study" allows adaptation, but the reasons for the adaptation must be explained
- If you are unsure whether a source is authentic, you must mark it as "this citation needs to be verified by the researcher"
Final output document
After completing the five steps, generate a structured framework document and call the Write tool to save it:
File naming:framework_[研究主题简称].md
Save path: current project directory
# 理论框架：[研究主题]
## 基本信息
- 研究问题：[...]
- 理论定位：[A/B/C + 说明]
- 生成日期：[日期]
## 核心现象陈述
[第二步输出]
## 理论评估摘要
[第三步输出——每个候选理论的评估]
## 理论选择论证
[第四步输出]
选定理论：[主理论] + [辅助理论（如有）]
整合逻辑：[...]
## 核心概念操作化
[第五步输出——每个概念的完整操作化表]
## 对论文写作的含义
理论定位：[A/B/C]
理论框架在论文中的位置：
- A → 独立章节，位于方法论之前
- B → 无独立章节，理论建构在讨论章节展开
- C → 嵌入方法论章节，作为理论取向说明
After the Write tool has saved it, inform the researcher:
"The theoretical framework document has been saved to
framework_[研究主题].md. If in ta-research-workflow, please continue to the next checkpoint; If you need to proceed directly to chapter writing, you can enableta-framework-writer。"
Language
- Default to Chinese, with English original terms annotated alongside academic terminology
- When citing original works, in Chinese research prioritize using terminology from existing Chinese translations