Abstract
Current uses of large language models (LLMs) for qualitative coding often rely on ad hoc prompting with limited guidance for reliability and human oversight. To address these limitations, we propose the Smart Coder Framework, a three-phase approach structuring human-LLM collaborative coding through Instruction, Prompt Strategy, and Reliability Check. We evaluated the framework using 72 middle-school mathematics teacher interview transcripts and a human-consensus benchmark. A factorial design compared instructed versus uninstructed prompts, few-shot versus few-shot plus chain-of-thought prompting, and single-pass versus self-consistency coding. Twelve transcripts were used for prompt development and calibration, and 60 for the formal evaluation. In the results, instruction consistently improved agreement. Chain-of-thought further improved agreement under adequate instruction, and self-consistency produced smaller, theme-dependent gains but helped identify unstable decisions for human review. Performance also varied by transcript characteristics. Overall, the framework systematically structures and monitors LLM-assisted qualitative coding while preserving human authority over coding decisions.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.33205
