Grounded Theory
Introduction
Grounded Theory (GT) is a systematic methodology in the social sciences involving the construction of theories through methodical gathering and analysis of data. It is a research method that operates almost in a reverse fashion from traditional research and at first may appear to be in contradiction to the scientific method. Rather than beginning with a hypothesis, the first step is data collection, through a variety of methods. From the data collected, key points are marked with a series of codes, which are extracted from the text. The codes are grouped into similar concepts in order to make them more workable. From these concepts, categories are formed, which are the basis for the creation of a theory, or a reverse engineered hypothesis.
Historical Background
Grounded Theory was developed in the 1960s by sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss. Their collaboration resulted in the seminal work "The Discovery of Grounded Theory" published in 1967. This work was a response to the dominant quantitative research paradigms of the time, which Glaser and Strauss felt were inadequate for capturing the complexities of social phenomena. They proposed GT as a way to generate theory from data systematically obtained and analyzed in social research. The methodology was revolutionary in that it provided a rigorous framework for qualitative research, emphasizing the importance of empirical data over preconceived theories.
Methodological Principles
Data Collection
In Grounded Theory, data collection is an iterative process. Researchers collect data through various qualitative methods such as interviews, observations, and document analysis. The process is flexible and allows for adjustments as new insights emerge. The aim is to gather rich, detailed data that can provide a deep understanding of the studied phenomenon.
Coding and Categorization
Coding is a critical step in Grounded Theory. It involves breaking down data into discrete parts, closely examining them, and comparing them for similarities and differences. There are three main types of coding: open, axial, and selective.
- **Open Coding:** This is the initial stage where data is broken down into distinct parts and labeled with codes. The goal is to identify, name, categorize, and describe phenomena found in the text.
- **Axial Coding:** In this phase, the researcher relates codes (categories and properties) to each other, via a combination of inductive and deductive thinking. It involves reassembling data in new ways after open coding.
- **Selective Coding:** This is the process of integrating and refining the theory. The researcher identifies a core category and systematically relates it to other categories. The core category is central to the theory and provides a coherent narrative.
Theoretical Sampling
Theoretical sampling is a process of data collection for generating theory whereby the analyst jointly collects, codes, and analyzes data and decides what data to collect next and where to find them, in order to develop a theory as it emerges. This process is controlled by the emerging theory, which makes it unique compared to other sampling methods.
Constant Comparative Method
The constant comparative method is a key component of Grounded Theory. It involves the continuous comparison of data with emerging categories and concepts. This method ensures that the theory remains grounded in the data and evolves as new data is collected.
Memo-Writing
Memo-writing is an essential process in Grounded Theory. Memos are informal analytic notes that researchers write to themselves as they collect, code, and analyze data. Memos serve as a space for the researcher to reflect on the data, explore ideas, and develop theoretical insights.
Theoretical Saturation
Theoretical saturation is reached when no new data are emerging that add to the development of a category. It is the point at which gathering more data does not lead to more information related to the research questions.
Applications of Grounded Theory
Grounded Theory is widely used in various fields such as sociology, psychology, education, nursing, and business. It is particularly useful in areas where existing theories are inadequate or where little is known about a phenomenon. For example, in nursing, Grounded Theory can be used to explore patient experiences and develop theories about patient care. In business, it can help in understanding consumer behavior and developing marketing strategies.
Criticisms and Challenges
Despite its popularity, Grounded Theory has faced criticism. Some scholars argue that it lacks rigor and is too subjective, as it relies heavily on the researcher's interpretation of data. Others point out the difficulty in achieving true theoretical saturation, as it is often unclear when enough data has been collected. Additionally, the iterative nature of the method can be time-consuming and resource-intensive.
Variants and Developments
Over the years, Grounded Theory has evolved, leading to the development of several variants.
Classic Grounded Theory
Classic Grounded Theory, as proposed by Glaser, emphasizes the emergence of theory from data without forcing preconceived ideas onto the data. It advocates for a flexible and open-ended approach to data collection and analysis.
Straussian Grounded Theory
Straussian Grounded Theory, developed by Strauss and his collaborator Juliet Corbin, introduces more structured procedures and emphasizes the role of the researcher in interpreting data. It includes detailed coding procedures and the use of a coding paradigm to relate categories.
Constructivist Grounded Theory
Constructivist Grounded Theory, advanced by Kathy Charmaz, views the research process as a co-construction between the researcher and participants. It acknowledges the influence of the researcher's perspectives and emphasizes reflexivity and the subjective nature of data interpretation.
Conclusion
Grounded Theory remains a vital methodology in qualitative research, offering a systematic approach to theory development. Its flexibility and adaptability make it suitable for exploring complex social phenomena and generating new insights. Despite its challenges, it continues to be a valuable tool for researchers across various disciplines.