The easiest way to compare groups is create case classifications. For every document (which I assume are interviews), you want to classify them in their respective groups. You can create case classifications in the classification tabs on the bottom left of the screen (assuming you’re using windows). You right click and create a classification, similar to how you make nodes. Once you have your classifications,when you upload each interview/document you right click on the source and at the bottom there is a classification option. You then put each interview in their respective category. Within these groups (or classifications in NVIVO) I would recommend making sub categories for race, age, years on the job, what agency they work at ect. Basically, any sort of control variable you can think of that is relevant to your research question to have more complete understanding of how each group differs. Easiest way is just google “Case Classifications NVIVO” in google for tutorials. With the case classifications it allows you to do comparative “queries” to compare and contrast themes. Hope this helps. NVIVO is not the most intuitive program and you can often times find 10+ different ways to do the same thing. Making the software flexible, but also overwhelming. If you’ve never used NVIVO, I highly recommend watching tutorials on through QSR, they’re really helpful and will give you a good grasp on the basics. I highly recommend doing this because, if you end up setting up these things wrong (even basic nodes), you may waste A LOT of time doing analysis, but not actually being able to anything post coding. More on reddit.com

See if your university has an alumni deal. At some universities alumni get privileges. At others you can sign in as a visitor to the library and use the computers that have the software loaded. More on reddit.com

How many interviews is a "series"? "Coding" qualitative material is helpful to not get lost in ridiculous amounts of data but for only a little material I don't see the benefit. I always strongly advise hermeneutic approaches but that's not what you asked for. So I will throw "MaxQDA" oder "atlas.ti" your way. I believe they have trial versions. And perhaps ask your institution whether they have licenses for any product. More on reddit.com

I don't think NVivo is the right tool for this. For one, it's expensive and has a really big learning curve and it's purpose is to code texts (going through them and tagging different phrases or statements with meaningful codes). If by keyword you mean the literal keywords in the article's heading, you're best off just using a database or a spreadsheet.

More on reddit.com