And how to recognise the early signs of trouble
If there is one word that quietly causes more confusion in qualitative research than almost any other, it is “theme.”
Most researchers can describe what a code is. Many can explain what categories are. But when it comes to themes, confidence often wavers. Are themes just grouped codes? Are they topics? Are they participant stories? Are they interpretations?
The short answer is: it depends.
And that “depends” is exactly where the problem begins.
Themes are used everywhere and they don’t always mean the same thin
One reason themes are so often misunderstood is that they are not exclusive to Thematic Analysis, and even within TA, different versions define themes in different ways.
Themes appear in:
- Phenomenology
- Content analysis
- Grounded theory
- Ethnography
- Qualitative descriptive studies
- And many mixed or hybrid approaches
Across these traditions, themes are conceptualised differently. In some, they summarise content; in others, they express patterns of shared meaning. In some, they support theory development; in others, they are the findings.
In this post, we’ll zoom in on Thematic Analysis to explore how these differences show up even within a single method and why that matters for your analysis.
Even within TA, the meaning of “theme” depends on the analytic approach, for example, reflexive TA treats themes as constructed patterns of meaning, while coding reliability TA regards them as consistent categories derived from coding.
When researchers move between these methods, or combine frameworks without clear boundaries, the term theme can quietly absorb multiple, conflicting meanings.
What looks like flexibility is often actually conceptual drift.
When everything becomes a theme
In practice, this leads to a familiar pattern.
Researchers label almost anything a theme:
- A single word (“Support”)
- A topic (“Communication”)
- A participant issue (“Medication errors”)
- A domain of experience (“Family relationships”)
These labels may describe what participants talked about, but they often do not yet express what the researcher has understood about those experiences.
At this point, the analysis has not failed, but it has not yet reached the level of a theme.
Because a theme is not simply what appears in the data.
A theme is about what that data means.
One of the most common sources of confusion: the topic summary theme
In many projects, what gets labelled a “theme” is actually a topic summary, something like:
- “Communication”
- “Coping”
- “Support”
- “Barriers to care”
These headings help organise material. They structure sections. They feel familiar and tidy.
And in some approaches, such as content analysis or coding reliability forms of TA, this kind of summary may be entirely appropriate.
But in more interpretive approaches, such as reflexive TA, these kinds of labels often fall short of analytic depth. They tell us where the data sits — not what it means. They describe what was said, but not what was understood through analysis.
An analytic theme, by contrast, begins to express a pattern of shared meaning:
- How communication is experienced
- Why coping takes certain forms
- What support comes to represent
- How barriers are navigated or negotiated
The shift is subtle—but it is the shift from summary to interpretation.
Why this stage feels so hard
Many researchers report that coding feels manageable, even satisfying. But when they reach the point of developing themes, they feel uncertain, stuck, or unsure whether they are “doing it right.”
This is not a personal failure. It is a structural problem in how qualitative analysis is often taught.
Themes are:
- More abstract than codes
- Less rule-bound than categories
- More interpretive than descriptive labels
- And deeply shaped by the researcher’s analytic lens
They require researchers to stop asking:
“What did participants talk about?”
and start asking:
“What is going on here, across this dataset, that matters?”
That shift is intellectually demanding and rarely made explicit in teaching.
The cost of underdeveloped themes
When themes remain underdeveloped, several things happen:
- Findings feel thin or obvious
- Readers struggle to see the contribution
- Quotes do more work than analysis
- And the study risks looking descriptive rather than analytic
More importantly, the research misses an opportunity to advance understanding, rather than simply report experience.
Underdeveloped themes are not just a writing issue, they are an analytic one.
A theme is not the data
One of the most important — and most overlooked — distinctions in qualitative research is this:
Findings are not the data. Findings are the interpretation of the data.
Themes are not participant quotes.
They are not summaries of what was said.
They are the researcher’s carefully constructed account of what the data means.
This does not make themes subjective or arbitrary. It makes them analytic.
Themes sit at the intersection of:
- The data
- The research question
- The theoretical and methodological lens
- And the researcher’s interpretive judgement
Which is why clarity about what a theme is — and what it is not — matters so deeply.
If you are confused, you are not alone
The literature itself shows wide variation in how themes are defined, used, and taught. Even experienced researchers sometimes use the term differently across projects.
So if you have ever wondered:
- “Is this really a theme?”
- “Why do my themes feel vague?”
- “How do I know when a theme is good enough?”
You are not behind. You are standing exactly where many thoughtful qualitative researchers stand.
Where this leaves us
Themes are not just a technical output of analysis.
They are the heart of how qualitative research makes meaning visible.
But to work with themes well, we first have to be clear about:
- What different traditions mean by “theme”
- How themes differ from topics and categories
- And what kind of analytic work themes are meant to do
That clarity is absolutely foundational.
An invitation
If this post has raised questions for you about how you understand or use themes in your own work, you’re not alone and you don’t have to navigate that confusion on your own.
In my upcoming free webinar, I’ll be unpacking what counts as a theme in qualitative research and how different approaches define and use them differently.
If you’ve ever felt unclear about whether your themes are “right,” or why they feel underdeveloped, this session will give you the conceptual clarity and analytic grounding you need to move forward with confidence.
Because once you understand what a theme really is, everything else in your analysis starts to fall into place.
Book your spot
📅Thursday, Feb 19, 11-11.45am Australian Eastern Standard Time
