Data Analysis Implementation

Following the guidelines of hermeneutic analysis, we first coded based on the informants’

personal experience not using theoretical concepts at first. Our coding was inductive and based on the data. We had an emic approach in order to understand the individuals’

experiences within their social environment (Bergadaà, 2009). Below, we describe in further details the steps we have undergone in analyzing our data. Although the process is presented here as step by step, the analysis phase did not happen in this structured fashion. It involved a lot of iterations of going between parts to whole. In some instances, we had to go back and recode within the same level of coding, or a previous thread as new understandings and codes emerged. Also, sometimes we had to collect extra data to further support some of the

elements of our results.

First, we sough to understand each thread as a whole and make connections between different messages of the thread to its overall meaning. The second step involved a new level of part-to-whole iteration, where different messages then different threads are linked to each other and shared patterns are recorded. Once the overall themes have been identified across the various threads, we made sure that each theme was backed up within separate messages.

- Stage 1

Prior to coding, we first immersed ourselves in the data. This has been achieved through the observation period of the community described in the Netnography chapter and the data collection process. This step involved reading the whole body of data. In order to analyze our data, we first read whole discussion threads individually to get a feeling of the whole. Our objective was to understand each thread as a whole and to make connections between different messages of the thread to its overall meaning. We have started with an initial coding process whereby we have tried to identify a first level of codes. Belk et al (2013) in reference to Ely et al. (1997) explain that coding implies identifying fragments of data that hold their meaning when taken outside their context. They quote that "Codes are concepts and these concepts vary in their concreteness/abstractness and their emic/etic nature.

Another way of describing coding is 'reducing data into meaningful segments and assigning names for the segments"(Creswell, 2012, p. 148).

During this stage, the coding was mainly emic, which means that the codes derived directly from the language used by informants and reflected their lived experiences. While our coding was inductive, it was still influenced by our research question (Belk et al., 2013). Emic coding was enabled by the researcher's personal lived experience. Indeed, the researcher falls within the overweight category, which made her prone to understand and empathize with the stigmatizing experiences of the studied consumers.

We have made a table where the page of the code within the entire data set has been recorded to be able to find the verbatims. Also, we have added a comments’ column next to the codes for researcher notes taking. We have identified codes relating to the stigma

experienced by members and also ones that reflected communal practices. This first level of coding reflects the language used by informants. We have followed Belk et al.’s (2013) recommendations and gave particular attention to metaphors, strong emotions, phrases heard in other contexts, key actors, underlying motives, resulting actions, and contradictions. The

objective was to uncover potential meaningful patterns. We looked at the collective coping strategies developed within the community regarding the different experiences of

stigmatization. We also looked at the external and internal factors that came into place for choosing one coping strategy over another. We analyzed individual experiences, and strived to identify each informant’s stigma experience. Our objective was to identify themes related to stigma and consumption. The analysis at this stage was idiographic, meaning that the focus has been on looking at individual experiences separately. While the codes emerged from members' scripts, we looked for occurrences of stigma, coping and communal practices within the informants' lived experiences. Our objective was to get a holistic understanding of the stigma experienced collectively and of the role of the community and how consumption came into play.

- Stage 2

This stage involved a new level of part-to-whole iterations, where different messages, then different threads, are linked to each other and shared patterns are recorded. As we analyzed our data, we have looked at the entire body of first level codes within individual cases, and examined how they can be merged into categories that stepped up in terms of abstraction. In order to combine these lower level codes into higher ones we had to seek for relationships between codes. We have followed Belk et al.’s (2013) recommendations in this regard. First, we looked whether the codes represented different dimensions of the stigma experience or community construct. We also looked at potential sequencing of the codes since they could represent elements of a process. Finally, we examined how some codes can explain other codes or phenomena. We tried to understand their relationships and whether they could represent causes or consequences.

At this stage, we have also undergone an iterative process between individual stories and understanding of the entire data set. As we analyzed, we compared the different threads and individual stories amongst them to identify common patterns. We also started looking for variations within the data and we tried to uncover the differences between the categories (Thompson, 1997). The objective was to spot patterns that applied to different informants and the common patterns pertaining to the community.

- Stage 3

Here, we further collapsed the different codes into themes. The emerging themes were contrasted with the relevant literature to achieve a better understanding (James, Handelman,

& Taylor, 2011). We adopted an iterative process of moving from individual data to an understanding of the whole data set. We were looking to remove inconsistencies from our interpretation. Also, our focus went from looking for patterns in the data to seeking for meaning within those patterns (Belk et al., 2013). At this stage our interpretation was etic, which involved a higher level of abstraction. This involved linking consumer accounts to existing theories relevant to our topic (Thompson, 1996). During this process of

interpretation, we made sure we incorporated broader theories related to the cultural and social context in which our informants were socially embedded. The objective was to generate a holistic understanding of the stigma experience, and the role of the community. This had been done through identifying the common attributes of the different consumer narratives.

In addition to focusing on the lived consumer experience, we have tried to incorporate the impact of markets and social systems on the consumer despite not being felt nor

experienced by our informants. The objective was to go beyond the consumer narratives in order to understand the nature of consumption within its social and cultural context.

Askegaard and Linnet (2011) argue that interpretive consumer research has been focusing on the lived experience in an isolated fashion; hence ignoring the consumer’s “experiential universe”. They discuss that there is a need for a broader framework of interpretation that goes beyond the lived experience to take into account the cultural and social environments in which the consumer has been socialized. They argue for Thompson et al.’s (1989) initial guidance that the researcher should avoid fragmenting the individual experience, and that in line with a holistic approach, understand the experience within its context.

Askegaard and Linnet (2011) criticized most phenomenological studies in interpretive consumer research because they only focus on the emic perspective and not on theorizing the phenomenon within its context. In this regard, the researcher may overlook broader cultural issues in which the phenomenon under scrutiny is embedded (Bergadaà, 1990). This view follows the phenomenology of Schutz (1970) that perceives the individual as socially embedded and consumption as a social act. Hence, during our analysis, we scrutinized each discussion thread to understand how members' replies were incorporated into the individuals’

thinking schemes and how they influence the individuals’ consumption intentions.

This contextual understanding is particularly relevant to social stigma. The stigma process starts with internalization of societal norms and stereotyping consequences resulting from not complying with these norms. Hence, it is important to complement the understanding of the lived experience of the stigmatized with understandings relating to the environment and the social structures that gave birth to this stigma. This is because consumer practices are shaped by these external social environments, and not only pertain to the independent consumer.