It’s time to write up your reflexive thematic analysis. This is the sixth and final stage of the Braun and Clarke process, so this should be the easier part, right?
All of the difficult things have been done - coding, developing themes, refining themes - now it’s just a case of writing it all up. The finish line is in sight, hurrah!
Yeah… Sorry to break it to you but this is the point where many PhD researchers stall because the writing up is asking you to do something different from the other five phases of reflexive thematic analysis. It’s a gear change. Lots of driving analogies today. 😉
Over the years, I’ve asked many PhD researchers how their findings chapter is going and seen the same reaction more times than I can count - a bit of awkward shuffling and widened eyes, then some version of: “I know what I found. I just can’t seem to get it onto the page.”
Which usually means - they’ve done the analysis, they know their data well, but turning that into something clear and coherent - that doesn’t look like brain vomit and that another smart human being could understand - gets really tricky.
That gear change I was talking about earlier? What does it involve? Well, in simple terms - explaining your thinking in a way that holds together. Easier said than done.
What does “writing up reflexive thematic analysis” actually mean?
Well, essentially, it's time to commit to your interpretation of the data. That can feel a bit… vulnerable.
Because up until now, you've been able to faff around a bit. You've coded your data, developed some themes, changed your mind about those themes, gone back to your codes, wondered whether you've completely lost the plot, thrown everything in the metaphorical bin and started again.
That's fine! That's part of the process. Most researchers do that (even if they don’t admit to it).
But now you've reached the point where you need to start putting your interpretation into words. Words that other people are going to read. Your supervisors. Your examiners. Other researchers.
Gulp.
Yeah. All those decisions you've been making feel a bit more consequential, don't they?
But before you scuttle off muttering “Mmm, I might take another look at those themes after all”, hear me out: You're not claiming that you've uncovered the one and only correct interpretation of your data. That's not how Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis works.
You're saying, “This is how I've made sense of these data. These are the patterns of shared meaning I've developed, and this is why I think they matter.”
Your job now is to take your reader through that thinking, using your themes, data extracts and interpretation to build an argument that makes sense.
It doesn't mean your analysis is set in stone and you can never revisit a theme - of course you can. Writing itself can help you notice things you hadn't quite worked out yet. You don't have to get everything sorted before you start writing - writing will help you do that.
But, thing is, Bob (sorry if your name’s not Bob!), you do have to stop endlessly rearranging the furniture at some point and start showing people around the house.
Psst… Have you suddenly found a hundred other things to do instead of writing up your findings?
So, the results are in, you’ve done the analysis, but… now you've got to turn it all into something that makes sense on the page, and suddenly reorganising the sock drawer feels rather appealing.
Yeah. This is the spicy bit, working out how to explain what your findings mean and what your research actually contributes. No pressure.
If that's where you're getting stuck, my Discussion & Writing Up PhD Survival Guide can help you work through it. It's designed to help you get your thinking out of your head and onto the page.
It’s not just something you passively read either, I actually get you to do stuff.
You’ll fill in worksheets with your own ideas and interpretations, which will allow your contribution to knowledge to actually start taking shape - rather than just reading about how you should be doing it then feeling bad when you can’t seem to write anything.
Start your chapter with a clear thematic roadmap
“Ooh - a thematic roadmap, sounds fancy - what’s that?”, I hear you say. Well, it’s basically getting straight to the point and telling your reader, ‘Here’s what I’m going to show you’. After introducing the chapter, name your themes clearly and early. Do not treat them like a surprise reveal.
For example:
This chapter presents four themes constructed through reflexive thematic analysis. Together, they illustrate how remote work reshaped professional relationships, blurred work–home boundaries, reconfigured communication practices, and prompted reflection on productivity and identity.
Then list them explicitly:
Dynamics of remote work relationships
Blurred work–home boundaries
Digital communication and work culture
Productivity, discipline, and self-perception
Speaking as a former PhD examiner, when I spent literal weeks of my life going through PhD theses line by line - the clearer you can be from the outset about what is coming up - the better.
Your examiner doesn’t want to be presented with a puzzle that they have to work out for themselves. Tell them straight - here are my themes - then expand on them. They will love you for it. Well, maybe they won’t love you, but you will be one of their favourite PhD candidates, which can only be a good thing. 😉
Writing up each theme: think in three layers
Each theme functions like a mini-argument, which moves through three layers:
Description of the theme
Illustrative data extracts
Interpretation and conceptual development
Let’s walk through this using one theme.
1. Introduce and describe the theme
Begin by defining what the theme captures.
For example:
This theme captures participants’ experiences of blurred boundaries between work and home during remote working. Many described difficulty establishing psychological and temporal separation between professional responsibilities and personal life.
Be specific. Define the organising concept behind the theme. No faffing around.
2. Use quotes and data extracts strategically
Quotes are evidence, they are not simply a nice sparkly decoration - so, when you include a quote, be very clear about its function. What is this quote doing for your write-up? If it’s just hanging around on a street corner like a bored teenager looking like it’s up to no good, you need to move it along.
Choose extracts that actually earn their place. They should help your reader understand what your theme is getting at, show something important about the pattern of shared meaning you've developed, or give you something interesting to get your analytical teeth into.
Also - please don't just line up a load of quotes and occasionally pop your head up to say, “Here's another participant saying something similar!”
We don't need a guided tour of your transcripts. We need to know what YOU make of the data and why it matters.
Let's see what this looks like in practice.
Imagine you've developed a theme about how remote working blurred the boundaries between people's professional and personal lives.
One of your participants says:
I was technically at home, but I never really felt like I'd finished work.
Now, you could plonk that quote into your chapter and write something like:
This participant experienced difficulties separating work and home life.
Well, yes. They literally just told us that. We've essentially repeated what they said, but in slightly more academic-sounding words. Congratulations, we've achieved precisely nothing.
Instead, have a think about what's interesting here.
The participant is physically at home, but psychologically they're still at work. The distinction between where work happens and when work ends has become rather muddled.
So, you might write:
This account illustrates how the physical separation between work and home became less meaningful during remote working. Although the participant was no longer in their workplace, they continued to experience the psychological demands of work, suggesting that the boundaries between professional and personal life were not simply spatial, but emotional and temporal.
See the difference?
We're no longer just telling the reader what the participant said. We're using the extract to develop an interpretation of what their experience might tell us about the wider pattern of meaning we're exploring.
That's what it means to make your data work for your argument.
3. Move explicitly into interpretation
This is the point where many researchers become overly cautious. They worry about overclaiming or saying something too obvious, “Am I allowed to say that? I’m just a PhD researcher, who am I to say this is a thing?!” As a result, they describe what participants said but stop short of explaining why it matters. After presenting the data, you must answer the question: So what? Come on, put yourself out there (as the kids say).
For example:
This theme suggests that the perceived flexibility of remote work functioned as a double-edged sword. While autonomy was initially framed as empowering, participants’ accounts revealed an emerging “always on” culture that intensified emotional fatigue and boundary erosion.
You can then link to theory, connect to existing literature, identify tensions or contradictions, and highlight implications.
For instance:
These findings resonate with literature on digital burnout and boundary permeability, extending prior research by foregrounding the emotional labour involved in self-regulation during remote work contexts.
This is the movement from description to contribution. Get you. 😉
Where reflexivity belongs in the write-up
Because this is reflexive thematic analysis, your role as researcher must be visible. You are not a neutral observer, you are an interpretive instrument. Oh yes you are.
Reflexivity might include:
Acknowledging how your background shaped how you approached the analysis - what particular things were you sensitive to that someone else might not be?
Explaining moments of tension or reinterpretation - did you change your mind about something? Why?
Reflecting on how theory impacted upon your analysis - what theoretical camp (or camps) do you hang around in? How might this have impacted the way you made sense of your data?
For example:
As a researcher who was also working remotely during the pandemic, I was particularly attuned to participants’ descriptions of blurred boundaries. I remained reflexively aware of how this shared context might heighten sensitivity to emotional fatigue within the data.
This strengthens, rather than weakens, your analysis. In reflexive thematic analysis, we're not pretending the researcher can simply disappear from the research process. Sorry, Professor Stuffypants.
After presenting all themes: zoom out
Once you have written up each theme individually, step back. Take a moment.
Your findings chapter should not end abruptly after the final theme. I have read so many findings chapters like that - they’re like a disappointing end to a Netflix season. You’re there with your snacks, on the sofa, all excited for the ending and it’s like….parp.
Here, we’re all about synthesis, okay? Joining up the dots, connecting up the wires - looking across your analysis, not just at one part of it.
For example:
Taken together, these themes illustrate how remote work reconfigured both structural and emotional dimensions of professional life. While Themes 1 and 3 focus on relational and communicative shifts, Themes 2 and 4 reveal internal negotiations around identity and discipline. Viewed holistically, the findings suggest a layered process of adaptation marked by both autonomy and strain.
This is where you demonstrate coherence. Boom.
Return to your research aims
Before closing the chapter, explicitly reconnect to your research questions. “Oh take me back to the start”, as Chris Martin warbled in The Scientist - one of Coldplay’s most underrated songs, IMHO.
For example:
This study set out to explore how remote work during the pandemic shaped employees’ professional experiences and wellbeing. The themes collectively show that remote working altered not only organisational practices but also participants’ sense of identity, boundary control, and emotional resilience.
This anchors your findings within your original purpose, full circle. I’s are dotted, T’s are crossed.
Want more help writing up your analysis?
▶️ WATCH: Let me talk you through it
Prefer to see me explain it? Watch my YouTube video on writing up Braun & Clarke’s Reflexive Thematic Analysis, where I talk you through the process in more detail.
📥 REALLY struggling to write, like seriously?
Spend 10 minutes reading this and doing the thing I suggest. It might help, it might not - it’s worth a punt.
🧑💻 GO DEEPER: Turn your analysis into a strong discussion
If the bigger struggle is moving from “this is what I found” to “this is what it means”, my Discussion & Writing Up PhD Survival Guide helps you figure that out, and write actual words that you aren’t embarrassed to send to your supervisor. It’s not just something you read, it’s something you DO! Yes, there are worksheets, because worksheets work. 😉
