Environment and Planning A 1997, volume 29, pages 1109-1124 Software for qualitative research: 2. Some thoughts on 'aiding' analysis S J Hinchliffe Department of Geography and Centre for Social Theory and Technology, Keele University, Keele, Staffs ST5 5BG, England; e-mail: s.j.hinchliffe@keele.ac.uk M A Crang Department of Geography, Durham University, Science Laboratories, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, England; e-mail: m.a.crang@durham.ac.uk S M Reimer Department of Geography, Hall University, Cottingham Road, Hull HU6 7RX, England; e-mail: s.m.reimer@geo.hull.ac.uk A C Hudson Department of Geography, Cambridge University, Downing Place, Cambridge CB2 3EN, England; e-mail: achl005@hermes.cam.ac.uk Received 20 May 1996; in revised form 29 October 1996 Abstract. In this paper we reject accounts which portray computer aided qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) as neutral and benign. We argue that applying computer software to qualitative projects raises a number of important issues that go to the heart of ethnography. Although we initially work with a distinction between tactile and digital ethnographies, the issues that we raise are not unique to computer-aided analyses. Indeed, we argue that the adoption of computers marks a useful moment in which to think critically about the means and ends of qualitative analysis. In this paper we urge qualitative researchers to avoid both an outright rejection and an unquestioning adoption of computer software packages. Rather, we work towards a 'crafty' approach to ethnography where computers are incorporated into the body of research in a critically reflexive and creative manner. We end the paper with some thoughts on the potential of such incorporation. Introduction In this paper we present some thoughts on the ways in which computer packages can be said to 'aid' the process of textual analysis. The aims of the paper are to foreground the implications of moving from techniques of analysis which can be described as conven- tional (including the use of card index systems, numerous piles of paper, paper and ink notations) to those which in some way try to mimic or extend these activities through the application of computer software. The tone of the paper might at first be read as fairly negative. It might even sound, in places, as though we are being determinist in our account of the various technologies that are currently available. And yet, in offering these thoughts, we hope that the use of computer-aided textual analysis can develop within geography in more reflexive ways. This is not a neoluddite response to computer software (compare Roszak, 1994) even though we like the metaphor of 'craft' as it is applied to working with qualitative materials. Although the details are far from clear, we might even say that we think computers can aid in our craftiness. (1) (l) Some of us are happier than others with this use of the term craft. It's a risky term, but we hope to be able to suggest the idea that we can be inventive and creative with computer programs in a wily and astute fashion. We would also like to hold onto some notion of a collective identity that the term can evoke. We hope that the slippages we play on in using this term do not lead to the forms of exclusivity that can also be suggested by the term craft. In particular we are wary of the gendering the term can perform and the possibility that craftiness can be a byword for mystification.