Research Methods: Grounded Theory

Cutting to the Methodological Chase on Grounded Theory As a Methodoloogy

  

1)  Grounded theory:

--begins with data, not a formal hypothesis, or an initial assumption

--works toward theory (overarching concepts, models, formal theory)---you collect/create data (yes, plural) that might add up to theorizing

--works toward insights, hypotheses, questions which call for more data

--deals with social phenomena, those experiences, occurrences that qualitative researchers are interested in

--working method or method of data analysis is called constant comparison,  that is, it is systematic, purposeful

            --this means searching for similarities (themes) and differences

--from qualitative data gained from interviews, observed actions and events, documents

--when similarities and differences are discovered among the data, they are coded (codes can be original or prompted by seemingly related theory or even from prior studies working with similar questions and data); the codes become categories which the researcher labels; then the various data are placed within these categories

--researcher goes to the literature (research and theorizing that have already been established—out there in the journals, documents, etc.); and goes back in an iterative process through the data collected, to double check on  and sharpen the categorization of the data (are the initial codes that have been established as accurate as possible? Should they be modified or additional codes/categories developed?)

--after the data have been exhaustively reviewed and codes checked and re-checked, theories or overarching concepts are formed

2) Grounded theorists work with theoretical sampling or purposive sampling, wherein research participants or cases are chosen, not because they are necessarily representative of what you are researching, but because they are relevant to the phenomenon you are investigating. What these research participants have experienced or what they have to say and/or what apparently goes on in a given organization, school, etc. promises (already) to provide you with the kinds of information/insights that you need in investigation. [This research site and the data that it might offer have a good chance of providing you with the insights/understandings that you are researching.] You might choose 2 cases, for example, of what you think (theoretically or though prior acquaintance) will provide you with similar qualities or you might intentionally choose contrasting cases.

--make certain that you define carefully why you chose the sample (the case, participants, organizations, etc.). This holds for all samples. Why did you choose to do your research on this sample--organizations, students, families, events, etc.

3) theoretical saturation: as you continue to code and comb through your data, back and forth, after a while you will not find anything new or revealing. When this happens you have likely done enough analysis. You have reached theoretical saturation.  

In the big picture in qualitative research, we are all working from the ground up.

--I have a question.

--I seek answers via data collection.

--I ask: So what does this data add up to in the end? [understanding, concepts, theories that need more investigation, questions]