Writing and communication researchers are in the early stages of developing procedures for reusing and maximizing the analytical potentials of qualitative data. Contributing to this effort, we critically reflect on our methodological decision-making process in developing innovative procedures for cross-analyzing two distinct studies. Our reflection responds to the need for published guidance on how to undertake methodological adaptation, the lack of which limits opportunities for other researchers to develop new study procedures to address complex problems. By discussing how and why we made particular methodological choices and adaptations in our collaborative study of faculty and doctoral student writers, we propose collaborative secondary data analysis as a fruitful avenue for qualitative writing researchers and show its potential to enact richer and more equitable research designs.

写作和传播研究人员正处于开发程序的早期阶段，以重用和最大化定性数据的分析潜力。为此，我们在开发用于交叉分析两个不同研究的创新程序时，批判性地反思了我们的方法决策过程。我们的反思是对出版有关如何进行方法学适应性修改的指南的需求所做出的回应，而缺乏指导性则限制了其他研究人员开发新的研究程序以解决复杂问题的机会。通过讨论在对教师和博士生作家的合作研究中我们如何以及为什么做出特殊的方法选择和改编，