A finished coding spreadsheet holds the whole analysis, but not its shape. Hundreds of rows tell you what you coded; they do not show you how the codes sit together, which themes are carrying the weight, or where one idea ends and the next begins. That shape usually lives in the researcher's head, or on a sheet of paper covered in circles and arrows.
Braun and Clarke have long suggested drawing thematic maps as part of reflexive thematic analysis, as a way of thinking through candidate themes and the relationships between them (Braun & Clarke, 2006). A map is a thinking tool first and a figure second. This article looks at three ways of drawing the same map, and at the phases of analysis where each one tends to help most. The examples come from Working Well, the made up dataset about working from home that opens in the Themescape demo.
Why one map needs more than one view
Every view of a map makes some relationships easy to see and hides others. A network shows clustering: which codes gather around a theme and which sit at its edges. A tree shows nesting: what belongs under what, level by level. An outline shows quantity: how much coded data sits beneath each heading.
None of these is the analysis. In reflexive thematic analysis a theme matters because of what it says about the data in relation to the research question, not because of how many quotes it holds, and Braun and Clarke are clear that prevalence is not the same as importance. The views are ways of asking questions of your own coding. Switching between them is useful precisely because each one makes you notice something different.
Generating initial themes: start with the network
Phase 3, generating initial themes, is where codes are first clustered into candidate themes. At this point you want to see everything at once, and the node network is the view built for that. Each theme is a solid circle in its own colour, its codes sit around it in a lighter fill, and each quote is a small silver dot joined to its code.
Seen this way, the Working Well data shows quickly that Boundaries and Overwork is the largest theme, with five codes, while Connection and Isolation and Autonomy and Trust have three each. That is not a verdict on either theme. It is a prompt: is Boundaries and Overwork one pattern of shared meaning, or two that have been gathered together because they share a topic?
Selecting a theme keeps everything connected to it clear and fades the rest, so you can read one candidate theme on its own without losing your place on the map. In Work mode, Custom placement lets you drag themes and codes into an arrangement of your own, for example putting the candidate themes you think are related next to each other while you decide.
Developing and reviewing themes: the file tree for a careful pass
Phase 4 asks for two kinds of review. First, do the coded extracts under each theme fit together? Then, does the set of themes work across the whole dataset? Both are slow, careful reading, and both are easier with a view that puts everything in one column.
The file tree lists every theme, code and sub-code as an indented outline, like folders on a computer, with a quote count on every row. It is the densest of the three views and the quickest to scan from top to bottom. Selecting a row opens its quotes in the reader beside it, so you can work through each code in turn and ask whether its quotes still belong together.
The file tree is also where loose ends show. Quotes with only a candidate theme sit under that working theme, and quotes with neither a theme nor a candidate theme are grouped under Uncategorised. Reviewing themes is a good moment to deal with both. As with the network, the counts are prompts rather than measures: a code with two quotes may be thin, or it may be a small, sharp idea that matters.
Refining, defining and naming: the hierarchy
By phase 5 the structure is settling, and the questions become ones of definition and fit. Does each code belong under the theme it sits beneath? Is any theme carrying codes from another? Can each theme be stated in a sentence or two?
The hierarchy is the view for those questions. It lays the same coding out top to bottom: the project at the top, the themes beneath it, and each theme's codes and sub-codes branching below. In Working Well, Wellbeing and Burnout sits above four codes, Exhaustion Signals, Recovery Rituals, Blurring of Rest and Seeking Support, and Exhaustion Signals branches again into two sub-codes, Physical Tiredness and Emotional Flatness. Read as a tree, it is easy to ask whether Blurring of Rest belongs here or under Boundaries and Overwork, which holds the closely related Blurred Work Hours.
The hierarchy is also the view most like a findings chapter, with a heading for each theme and a subheading for each code. Reading down it before you start writing is a quick check that the chapter you are about to write has a shape you can defend. The order column in the Framework tab sets the order of the themes, and Custom placement lets you reorder them for the display.
Writing up: choosing a view for the figure
When the map has to leave the screen and go into a document, the choice of view becomes a choice about the reader. A hierarchy reads top to bottom and usually fits a single column, which suits a thesis chapter or a journal figure. A node network shows how the parts relate and suits a slide or a poster, where it can be explained aloud.
In Themescape, Figure export makes a figure from the view you choose, sized for a single column, a thesis page or a poster, as a PNG, JPG or vector PDF in your referencing style. For a figure you shape by hand, Build mode, which is in beta, turns each Figure style into a starting layout you can rearrange first. Whatever the view, a figure needs a caption that stands on its own, alt text for readers using a screen reader, and no names or quotes that could identify a participant.
Moving between the views
The three views always show the same coding, so moving between them never changes the analysis. Each view keeps its own arrangement, and the arrangements are saved in a small layout file when you save your progress, so a network you have grouped by hand and a hierarchy you have reordered can both be picked up next time.
A practical rhythm is to start each session in the network to see the whole, move to the file tree for careful reading, and finish in the hierarchy to check the structure. Over the course of an analysis the balance shifts: more network early on, more hierarchy towards the write up. Whichever view you are in, the decisions are yours. The map only makes them easier to see.
Further reading
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE.
Charlotte Price is the founder of Themescape.
