Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Grounded Theory: With The Help of The Computer

    Uploaded by

    sunshinecharlie
    This document discusses grounded theory as a qualitative research method. It provides background on grounded theory's development in reaction to dominant quantitative and grand theoretical approaches of the 1960s. The document outlines key aspects of grounded theory, including coding, constant comparison, theoretical sampling, and developing theories that are grounded in and fit the data. Both strengths and weaknesses of grounded theory are considered, such as its rigorous process but also potential limitations around incorporating prior knowledge and developing theories beyond surface levels.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Grounded Theory: With The Help of The Computer

    Uploaded by

    sunshinecharlie
    2K views12 pages
    This document discusses grounded theory as a qualitative research method. It provides background on grounded theory's development in reaction to dominant quantitative and grand theoretical approaches of the 1960s. The document outlines key aspects of grounded theory, including coding, constant comparison, theoretical sampling, and developing theories that are grounded in and fit the data. Both strengths and weaknesses of grounded theory are considered, such as its rigorous process but also potential limitations around incorporating prior knowledge and developing theories beyond surface levels.

    Original Title

    Grounded Theory

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses grounded theory as a qualitative research method. It provides background on grounded theory's development in reaction to dominant quantitative and grand theoretical approaches of the 1960s. The document outlines key aspects of grounded theory, including coding, constant comparison, theoretical sampling, and developing theories that are grounded in and fit the data. Both strengths and weaknesses of grounded theory are considered, such as its rigorous process but also potential limitations around incorporating prior knowledge and developing theories beyond surface levels.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    2K views12 pages

    Grounded Theory: With The Help of The Computer

    Uploaded by

    sunshinecharlie
    This document discusses grounded theory as a qualitative research method. It provides background on grounded theory's development in reaction to dominant quantitative and grand theoretical approaches of the 1960s. The document outlines key aspects of grounded theory, including coding, constant comparison, theoretical sampling, and developing theories that are grounded in and fit the data. Both strengths and weaknesses of grounded theory are considered, such as its rigorous process but also potential limitations around incorporating prior knowledge and developing theories beyond surface levels.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    of 12

    Grounded Theory

    With the help of the computer


    ([email protected])
    Agenda
     Grounded theory – background,
    characteristics and relevance today
     Discussions about your theories and
    experiences
     Grounded theory – strengths and
    weaknesses
     Reflections and additional examples
    of how to use NVivo in the research
    process (Love & Peter)
    Historic background of GT
     A reaction against the prevalent ideal in the
    USA in the 60’s
     At that time two research approaches were
    dominating
     Verification studies, quantitative based on positivistic ideals
     Grand theories without empirical connections (e.g. Parsons)
     Grounded theory must be understood as a
    reaction against these dominating research
    paradigms. Differences are maximized and
    the method appears as extreme
     The method also reflects a romantic ideal
    of originality and individuality which is in
    Relevance for contemporary
    management research
     Scandinavian management research
    is often problem driven. It has its
    roots in practice
     Glaser & Strauss are often quoted in
    dissertations but are seldom used
    rigorously
     GT has links to other methodological
    traditions which take the empirical
    material seriously - such as
    ethnography and ANT
    Foundations of GT
     Pragmatism – usefulness as important
    criterion
     Idiographic point of departure
     Qualitative focus
     Focus on exploration
     Sensitizing concepts in constant
    change
     Focus on social actions
     Closeness to the empirical material
    Some key aspects of GT
     Suggests the use of a broad range of
    different and rich data
     Coding as a central aspect of analysis
     Create categories with properties from data
     The power of comparison
     Different people, different points in time, different categories…
     Theoretical sampling
     Minimizing and maximizing differences in two steps
     From categories to substantial (focusing on
    an empirical phenomenon) and formal
    (focusing on a theoretical phenonenon)
    (Based on Alvesson & Sköldberg, 1994)
    grounded theories
    What is a good grounded
    theory?
     Fit with data
     Works in explaining the phenomenon
     Has relevance through analytic
    explanations of important problems
    and processes in the empirical setting
     Is durable through flexibility

    (Charmaz, 2000)
    Steps in developing a
    grounded theory
    1. Develop categories
     Use data available to develop labeled categories that fit data closely
    2. Saturate categories
     Accumulate examples of a given category until is is clear what future
    instances would be located in this category
    3. Abstract definitions
     Abstract a definition of the category by stating in a general form the
    criteria for putting further instances into this category
    4. Use the definitions
     Use definitions as a guide to emerging features of importance in
    further field work and as a stimulus to theoretical reflection
    Turner (1981; Baserad på Glaser & Strauss)
    Steps in developing a
    grounded theory
    1. Exploit categories fully
     Be aware of additional categories suggested by those you have produced, their
    inverse, their opposite, more specific and more general instances
    2. Note, develop and follow up links between
    categories
     Note relationships and develop hypotheses about the links between the
    categories
    3. Consider the conditions under which the links
    hold
     Examine any apparent or hypothesized relationships and specify the conditions
    4. Make connections, where relevant to existing
    theory
     Build bridges to existing work at this stage rather than at the outset of the
    research
    5. Use extreme comparisons to the maximum to
    test emerging relationships
     (1981;Identify
    Turner the
    Baserad på key& variables
    Glaser and dimensions and see whether the relationship
    Strauss)
    holds at the extremes of these variables
    Your reflections - GT
    strengths
     Makes analysis traceable and easier
    to refine
     Increases reliability and validity by
    proposing a rigorous process
     Helps deal with the generalizability
    issue in qualitative research
     Provides theories that fit data
     Enables new insights
     Requires and experienced and
    ”broad” researcher
    Your reflections - GT
    weaknesses/risks
     Cannot be entirely theory free
     The process/coding restricts the
    interpretive process
     Time consuming
     Theories become very local
     How is prior knowledge incorporated?
     Concept definition is a challenge
    Critique against GT
     Difficult to get beyond the ”common
    sense” level of analysis. Reveals
    surface structures but misses the
    underlying deep structures
     Data can never be free of theory
     Over reliance on a mechanical coding
    process
     A positivistic flavor which does not fit
    the focus on qualitative data
    Based on Alvesson & Sköldberg (1994)

    You might also like