Content Analysis in Counseling Research: A Meta‐Study of Methodological Components and Agreement Procedures

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study examined content analysis (CA) reporting practices in counseling research, with emphasis on methodological reporting and coder agreement. We analyzed 373 CA articles published from 1953 to 2024 across 28 counseling journals using a deductive coding framework based on Krippendorff's model of unitizing, sampling, recording, and reducing. We also examined reporting of coder agreement procedures and interrater reliability (IRR). Most articles reported sampling procedures (98%) and a coding scheme (80%), whereas fewer reported coder preparation (20%) or pilot testing (26%). Only 37% reported a specific IRR index. Reporting of coding schemes, pilot testing, use of multiple coders, and coding guides increased significantly across historical eras ( p s < 0.001); reporting of coder agreement also differed significantly by era ( p < 0.001). Findings suggest increased transparency over time but highlight persistent gaps in reporting practices, underscoring the need for clearer reporting standards that support evaluation of analytic procedures and reproducibility in counseling research.