In Edwards grounded theory study, theoretical sampling led to the inclusion of the partners of women who had presented to the emergency department. ‘In one interview a woman spoke of being aware that the ED staff had not acknowledged her partner. This statement led me to ask other women during their interviews if they had similar experiences, and ultimately to interview the partners to gain their perspectives. The study originally intended to only focus on the women and the nursing staff who provided the care’ (p. 50).
Thus, theoretical sampling is used to focus and generate data to feed the iterative process of continual comparative analysis of the data. 6
Intermediate coding, identifying a core category, theoretical data saturation, constant comparative analysis, theoretical sensitivity and memoing occur in the next phase of the GT process. 6 Intermediate coding builds on the initial coding phase. Where initial coding fractures the data, intermediate coding begins to transform basic data into more abstract concepts allowing the theory to emerge from the data. During this analytic stage, a process of reviewing categories and identifying which ones, if any, can be subsumed beneath other categories occurs and the properties or dimension of the developed categories are refined. Properties refer to the characteristics that are common to all the concepts in the category and dimensions are the variations of a property. 37
At this stage, a core category starts to become evident as developed categories form around a core concept; relationships are identified between categories and the analysis is refined. Birks and Mills 6 affirm that diagramming can aid analysis in the intermediate coding phase. Grounded theorists interact closely with the data during this phase, continually reassessing meaning to ascertain ‘what is really going on’ in the data. 30 Theoretical saturation ensues when new data analysis does not provide additional material to existing theoretical categories, and the categories are sufficiently explained. 6
Birks and Mills 6 described advanced coding as the ‘techniques used to facilitate integration of the final grounded theory’ (p. 177). These authors promote storyline technique (described in the following section) and theoretical coding as strategies for advancing analysis and theoretical integration. Advanced coding is essential to produce a theory that is grounded in the data and has explanatory power. 6 During the advanced coding phase, concepts that reach the stage of categories will be abstract, representing stories of many, reduced into highly conceptual terms. The findings are presented as a set of interrelated concepts as opposed to presenting themes. 28 Explanatory statements detail the relationships between categories and the central core category. 28
Storyline is a tool that can be used for theoretical integration. Birks and Mills 6 define storyline as ‘a strategy for facilitating integration, construction, formulation, and presentation of research findings through the production of a coherent grounded theory’ (p. 180). Storyline technique is first proposed with limited attention in Basics of Qualitative Research by Strauss and Corbin 12 and further developed by Birks et al. 38 as a tool for theoretical integration. The storyline is the conceptualisation of the core category. 6 This procedure builds a story that connects the categories and produces a discursive set of theoretical propositions. 24 Birks and Mills 6 contend that storyline can be ‘used to produce a comprehensive rendering of your grounded theory’ (p. 118). Birks et al. 38 had earlier concluded, ‘storyline enhances the development, presentation and comprehension of the outcomes of grounded theory research’ (p. 405). Once the storyline is developed, the GT is finalised using theoretical codes that ‘provide a framework for enhancing the explanatory power of the storyline and its potential as theory’. 6 Thus, storyline is the explication of the theory.
Theoretical coding occurs as the final culminating stage towards achieving a GT. 39 , 40 The purpose of theoretical coding is to integrate the substantive theory. 41 Saldaña 40 states, ‘theoretical coding integrates and synthesises the categories derived from coding and analysis to now create a theory’ (p. 224). Initial coding fractures the data while theoretical codes ‘weave the fractured story back together again into an organized whole theory’. 18 Advanced coding that integrates extant theory adds further explanatory power to the findings. 6 The examples in Box 2 describe the use of storyline as a technique.
Writing the storyline.
Baldwin describes in her GT study how ‘the process of writing the storyline allowed in-depth descriptions of the categories, and discussion of how the categories of (i) , (ii) and (iii) fit together to form the final theory: ’ (pp. 125–126). ‘The use of storyline as part of the finalisation of the theory from the data ensured that the final theory was grounded in the data’ (p. 201). In Chamberlain-Salaun GT study, writing the storyline enabled the identification of ‘gaps in the developing theory and to clarify categories and concepts. To address the gaps the researcher iteratively returned to the data and to the field and refine the storyline. Once the storyline was developed raw data was incorporated to support the story in much the same way as dialogue is included in a storybook or novel’. |
As presented in Figure 1 , theoretical sensitivity encompasses the entire research process. Glaser and Strauss 5 initially described the term theoretical sensitivity in The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Theoretical sensitivity is the ability to know when you identify a data segment that is important to your theory. While Strauss and Corbin 12 describe theoretical sensitivity as the insight into what is meaningful and of significance in the data for theory development, Birks and Mills 6 define theoretical sensitivity as ‘the ability to recognise and extract from the data elements that have relevance for the emerging theory’ (p. 181). Conducting GT research requires a balance between keeping an open mind and the ability to identify elements of theoretical significance during data generation and/or collection and data analysis. 6
Several analytic tools and techniques can be used to enhance theoretical sensitivity and increase the grounded theorist’s sensitivity to theoretical constructs in the data. 28 Birks and Mills 6 state, ‘as a grounded theorist becomes immersed in the data, their level of theoretical sensitivity to analytic possibilities will increase’ (p. 12). Developing sensitivity as a grounded theorist and the application of theoretical sensitivity throughout the research process allows the analytical focus to be directed towards theory development and ultimately result in an integrated and abstract GT. 6 The example in Box 3 highlights how analytic tools are employed to increase theoretical sensitivity.
Theoretical sensitivity.
Hoare et al. described how the lead author ‘ in pursuit of heightened theoretical sensitivity in a grounded theory study of information use by nurses working in general practice in New Zealand’. The article described the analytic tools the researcher used ‘to increase theoretical sensitivity’ which included ‘reading the literature, open coding, category building, reflecting in memos followed by doubling back on data collection once further lines of inquiry are opened up’. The article offers ‘an example of how analytical tools are employed to theoretically sample emerging concepts’ (pp. 240–241). |
The meticulous application of essential GT methods refines the analysis resulting in the generation of an integrated, comprehensive GT that explains a process relating to a particular phenomenon. 6 The results of a GT study are communicated as a set of concepts, related to each other in an interrelated whole, and expressed in the production of a substantive theory. 5 , 7 , 16 A substantive theory is a theoretical interpretation or explanation of a studied phenomenon 6 , 17 Thus, the hallmark of grounded theory is the generation of theory ‘abstracted from, or grounded in, data generated and collected by the researcher’. 6 However, to ensure quality in research requires the application of rigour throughout the research process.
The quality of a grounded theory can be related to three distinct areas underpinned by (1) the researcher’s expertise, knowledge and research skills; (2) methodological congruence with the research question; and (3) procedural precision in the use of methods. 6 Methodological congruence is substantiated when the philosophical position of the researcher is congruent with the research question and the methodological approach selected. 6 Data collection or generation and analytical conceptualisation need to be rigorous throughout the research process to secure excellence in the final grounded theory. 44
Procedural precision requires careful attention to maintaining a detailed audit trail, data management strategies and demonstrable procedural logic recorded using memos. 6 Organisation and management of research data, memos and literature can be assisted using software programs such as NVivo. An audit trail of decision-making, changes in the direction of the research and the rationale for decisions made are essential to ensure rigour in the final grounded theory. 6
This article offers a framework to assist novice researchers visualise the iterative processes that underpin a GT study. The fundamental process and methods used to generate an integrated grounded theory have been described. Novice researchers can adapt the framework presented to inform and guide the design of a GT study. This framework provides a useful guide to visualise the interplay between the methods and processes inherent in conducting GT. Research conducted ethically and with meticulous attention to process will ensure quality research outcomes that have relevance at the practice level.
Declaration of conflicting interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Saul McLeod, PhD
Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
Learn about our Editorial Process
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
Associate Editor for Simply Psychology
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
On This Page:
Grounded theory is a useful approach when you want to develop a new theory based on real-world data Instead of starting with a pre-existing theory, grounded theory lets the data guide the development of your theory.
Grounded theory is a qualitative method specifically designed to inductively generate theory from data. It was developed by Glaser and Strauss in 1967.
It is important to note that grounded theory is an inductive approach where a theory is developed from collected real-world data rather than trying to prove or disprove a hypothesis like in a deductive scientific approach
You gather information, look for patterns, and use those patterns to develop an explanation.
It is a way to understand why people do things and how those actions create patterns. Imagine you’re trying to figure out why your friends love a certain video game.
Instead of asking an adult, you observe your friends while they’re playing, listen to them talk about it, and maybe even play a little yourself. By studying their actions and words, you’re using grounded theory to build an understanding of their behavior.
This qualitative method of research focuses on real-life experiences and observations, letting theories emerge naturally from the data collected, like piecing together a puzzle without knowing the final image.
Grounded theory research is useful for beginning researchers, particularly graduate students, because it offers a clear and flexible framework for conducting a study on a new topic.
Grounded theory works best when existing theories are either insufficient or nonexistent for the topic at hand.
Since grounded theory is a continuously evolving process, researchers collect and analyze data until theoretical saturation is reached or no new insights can be gained.
The final product of a grounded theory (GT) study is an integrated and comprehensive grounded theory that explains a process or scheme associated with a phenomenon.
The quality of a GT study is judged on whether it produces this middle-range theory
Middle-range theories are sort of like explanations that focus on a specific part of society or a particular event. They don’t try to explain everything in the world. Instead, they zero in on things happening in certain groups, cultures, or situations.
Think of it like this: a grand theory is like trying to understand all of weather at once, but a middle-range theory is like focusing on how hurricanes form.
This terminology reflects the iterative, inductive, and comparative nature of grounded theory, which distinguishes it from other research approaches.
Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss first introduced grounded theory in 1967 in their book, The Discovery of Grounded Theory .
Their aim was to create a research method that prioritized real-world data to understand social behavior.
However, their approaches diverged over time, leading to two distinct versions: Glaserian and Straussian grounded theory.
The different versions of grounded theory diverge in their approaches to coding , theory construction, and the use of literature.
All versions of grounded theory share the goal of generating a middle-range theory that explains a social process or phenomenon.
They also emphasize the importance of theoretical sampling , constant comparative analysis , and theoretical saturation in developing a robust theory
Glaserian grounded theory emphasizes the emergence of theory from data and discourages the use of pre-existing literature.
Glaser believed that adopting a specific philosophical or disciplinary perspective reduces the broader potential of grounded theory.
For Glaser, prior understandings should be based on the general problem area and reading very wide to alert or sensitize one to a wide range of possibilities.
It prioritizes parsimony , scope , and modifiability in the resulting theory
Strauss and Corbin (1990) focused on developing the analytic techniques and providing guidance to novice researchers.
Straussian grounded theory utilizes a more structured approach to coding and analysis and acknowledges the role of the literature in shaping research.
It acknowledges the role of deduction and validation in addition to induction.
Strauss and Corbin also emphasize the use of unstructured interview questions to encourage participants to speak freely
Critics of this approach believe it produced a rigidity never intended for grounded theory.
This version, primarily associated with Charmaz, recognizes that knowledge is situated, partial, provisional, and socially constructed. It emphasizes abstract and conceptual understandings rather than explanations.
Kathy Charmaz expanded on original versions of GT, emphasizing the researcher’s role in interpreting findings
Constructivist grounded theory acknowledges the researcher’s influence on the research process and the co-creation of knowledge with participants
Developed by Clarke, this version builds upon Straussian and Constructivist grounded theory and incorporates postmodern , poststructuralist , and posthumanist perspectives.
Situational analysis incorporates postmodern perspectives and considers the role of nonhuman actors
It introduces the method of mapping to analyze complex situations and emphasizes both human and nonhuman elements .
Grounded theory can be conducted by individual researchers or research teams. If working in a team, it’s important to communicate regularly and ensure everyone is using the same coding system.
Grounded theory research is typically an iterative process. This means that researchers may move back and forth between these steps as they collect and analyze data.
Instead of doing everything in order, you repeat the steps over and over.
This cycle keeps going, which is why grounded theory is called a circular process.
Continue to gather and analyze data until no new insights or properties related to your categories emerge. This saturation point signals that the theory is comprehensive and well-substantiated by the data.
Theoretical sampling, collecting sufficient and rich data, and theoretical saturation help the grounded theorist to avoid a lack of “groundedness,” incomplete findings, and “premature closure.
Begin by considering the phenomenon you want to study and assess the current knowledge surrounding it.
However, refrain from detailing the specific aspects you seek to uncover about the phenomenon to prevent pre-existing assumptions from skewing the research.
Initially, select participants who are readily available ( convenience sampling ) or those recommended by existing participants ( snowball sampling ).
As the analysis progresses, transition to theoretical sampling , involving the deliberate selection of participants and data sources to refine your emerging theory.
This method is used to refine and develop a grounded theory. The researcher uses theoretical sampling to choose new participants or data sources based on the emerging findings of their study.
This could mean recruiting participants who can shed light on gaps in your understanding uncovered during the initial data analysis.
Theoretical sampling guides further data collection by identifying participants or data sources that can provide insights into gaps in the emerging theory
The goal is to gather data that will help to further develop and refine the emerging categories and theoretical concepts.
Theoretical sampling starts early in a GT study and generally requires the researcher to make amendments to their ethics approvals to accommodate new participant groups.
The researcher might use interviews, focus groups, observations, or a combination of methods to collect qualitative data.
Open coding is the first stage of coding in grounded theory, where you carefully examine and label segments of your data to identify initial concepts and ideas.
This process involves scrutinizing the data and creating codes grounded in the data itself.
The initial codes stay close to the data, aiming to capture and summarize critically and analytically what is happening in the data
To begin open coding, read through your data, such as interview transcripts, to gain a comprehensive understanding of what is being conveyed.
As you encounter segments of data that represent a distinct idea, concept, or action, you assign a code to that segment. These codes act as descriptive labels summarizing the meaning of the data segment.
For instance, if you were analyzing interview data about experiences with a new medication, a segment of data might describe a participant’s difficulty sleeping after taking the medication. This segment could be labeled with the code “trouble sleeping”
Open coding is a crucial step in grounded theory because it allows you to break down the data into manageable units and begin to see patterns and themes emerge.
As you continue coding, you constantly compare different segments of data to refine your understanding of existing codes and identify new ones.
For instance, excerpts describing difficulties with sleep might be grouped under the code “trouble sleeping”.
This iterative process of comparing data and refining codes helps ensure the codes accurately reflect the data.
Open coding is about staying close to the data, using in vivo terms or gerunds to maintain a sense of action and process
During open coding, it’s crucial to engage in memo writing. Memos serve as your “notes to self”, allowing you to reflect on the coding process, note emerging patterns, and ask analytical questions about the data.
Document your thoughts, questions, and insights in memos throughout the research process.
These memos serve multiple purposes: tracing your thought process, promoting reflexivity (self-reflection), facilitating collaboration if working in a team, and supporting theory development.
Early memos tend to be shorter and less conceptual, often serving as “preparatory” notes. Later memos become more analytical and conceptual as the research progresses.
Axial coding is the process of identifying connections between codes, grouping them together into categories to reveal relationships within the data.
Axial coding seeks to find the axes that connect various codes together.
For example, in research on school bullying, focused codes such as “Doubting oneself, getting low self-confidence, starting to agree with bullies” and “Getting lower self-confidence; blaming oneself” could be grouped together into a broader category representing the impact of bullying on self-perception.
Similarly, codes such as “Being left by friends” and “Avoiding school; feeling lonely and isolated” could be grouped into a category related to the social consequences of bullying.
These categories then become part of the emerging grounded theory, explaining the multifaceted aspects of the phenomenon.
Qualitative data analysis software often represents these categories as nested codes, visually demonstrating the hierarchy and interconnectedness of the concepts.
This hierarchical structure helps researchers organize their data, identify patterns, and develop a more nuanced understanding of the relationships between different aspects of the phenomenon being studied.
This process of axial coding is crucial for moving beyond descriptive accounts of the data towards a more theoretically rich and explanatory grounded theory.
During selective coding , the final development stage of grounded theory analysis, a researcher focuses on developing a detailed and integrated theory by selecting a core category and connecting it to other categories developed during earlier coding stages.
The core category is the central concept that links together the various categories and subcategories identified in the data and forms the foundation of the emergent grounded theory.
This core category will encapsulate the main theme of your grounded theory, that encompasses and elucidates the overarching process or phenomenon under investigation.
This phase involves a concentrated effort to refine and integrate categories, ensuring they align with the core category and contribute to the overall explanatory power of the theory.
The theory should comprehensively describe the process or scheme related to the phenomenon being studied.
For example, in a study on school bullying, if the core category is “victimization journey,” the researcher would selectively code data related to different stages of this journey, the factors contributing to each stage, and the consequences of experiencing these stages.
This might involve analyzing how victims initially attribute blame, their coping mechanisms, and the long-term impact of bullying on their self-perception.
Selective coding focuses on developing and saturating this core category, leading to a cohesive and integrated theory.
Through selective coding, researchers aim to achieve theoretical saturation, meaning no new properties or insights emerge from further data analysis.
This signifies that the core category and its related categories are well-defined, and the connections between them are thoroughly explored.
This rigorous process strengthens the trustworthiness of the findings by ensuring the theory is comprehensive and grounded in a rich dataset.
It’s important to note that while a grounded theory seeks to provide a comprehensive explanation, it remains grounded in the data.
The theory’s scope is limited to the specific phenomenon and context studied, and the researcher acknowledges that new data or perspectives might lead to modifications or refinements of the theory
Theoretical coding is a process in grounded theory where researchers use advanced abstractions, often from existing theories, to explain the relationships found in their data.
Theoretical coding often occurs later in the research process and involves using existing theories to explain the connections between codes and categories.
This process helps to strengthen the explanatory power of the grounded theory. Theoretical coding should not be confused with simply describing the data; instead, it aims to explain the phenomenon being studied, distinguishing grounded theory from purely descriptive research.
Using the developed codes, categories, and core category, create a model illustrating the process or phenomenon.
Present your findings in a clear and accessible manner, ensuring the theory is rooted in the data and explains the relationships between the identified concepts and categories.
The end product of this process is a well-defined, integrated grounded theory that explains a process or scheme related to the phenomenon studied.
Grounded Theory Review : This is an international journal that publishes articles on grounded theory.
Home » Grounded Theory – Methods, Examples and Guide
Table of Contents
Definition:
Grounded Theory is a qualitative research methodology that aims to generate theories based on data that are grounded in the empirical reality of the research context. The method involves a systematic process of data collection, coding, categorization, and analysis to identify patterns and relationships in the data.
The ultimate goal is to develop a theory that explains the phenomenon being studied, which is based on the data collected and analyzed rather than on preconceived notions or hypotheses. The resulting theory should be able to explain the phenomenon in a way that is consistent with the data and also accounts for variations and discrepancies in the data. Grounded Theory is widely used in sociology, psychology, management, and other social sciences to study a wide range of phenomena, such as organizational behavior, social interaction, and health care.
Grounded Theory was first introduced by sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss in the 1960s as a response to the limitations of traditional positivist approaches to social research. The approach was initially developed to study dying patients and their families in hospitals, but it was soon applied to other areas of sociology and beyond.
Glaser and Strauss published their seminal book “The Discovery of Grounded Theory” in 1967, in which they presented their approach to developing theory from empirical data. They argued that existing social theories often did not account for the complexity and diversity of social phenomena, and that the development of theory should be grounded in empirical data.
Since then, Grounded Theory has become a widely used methodology in the social sciences, and has been applied to a wide range of topics, including healthcare, education, business, and psychology. The approach has also evolved over time, with variations such as constructivist grounded theory and feminist grounded theory being developed to address specific criticisms and limitations of the original approach.
There are two main types of Grounded Theory: Classic Grounded Theory and Constructivist Grounded Theory.
This approach is based on the work of Glaser and Strauss, and emphasizes the discovery of a theory that is grounded in data. The focus is on generating a theory that explains the phenomenon being studied, without being influenced by preconceived notions or existing theories. The process involves a continuous cycle of data collection, coding, and analysis, with the aim of developing categories and subcategories that are grounded in the data. The categories and subcategories are then compared and synthesized to generate a theory that explains the phenomenon.
This approach is based on the work of Charmaz, and emphasizes the role of the researcher in the process of theory development. The focus is on understanding how individuals construct meaning and interpret their experiences, rather than on discovering an objective truth. The process involves a reflexive and iterative approach to data collection, coding, and analysis, with the aim of developing categories that are grounded in the data and the researcher’s interpretations of the data. The categories are then compared and synthesized to generate a theory that accounts for the multiple perspectives and interpretations of the phenomenon being studied.
Here are some general guidelines for conducting a Grounded Theory study:
Grounded Theory Data Collection Methods are as follows:
Grounded Theory Data Analysis Methods are as follows:
Here are some of the key applications of Grounded Theory:
Examples of Grounded Theory in different case studies are as follows:
A Grounded Theory Research Example Would be:
Research question : What is the experience of first-generation college students in navigating the college admission process?
Data collection : The researcher conducted interviews with first-generation college students who had recently gone through the college admission process. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.
Data analysis: The researcher used a constant comparative method to analyze the data. This involved coding the data, comparing codes, and constantly revising the codes to identify common themes and patterns. The researcher also used memoing, which involved writing notes and reflections on the data and analysis.
Findings : Through the analysis of the data, the researcher identified several themes related to the experience of first-generation college students in navigating the college admission process, such as feeling overwhelmed by the complexity of the process, lacking knowledge about the process, and facing financial barriers.
Theory development: Based on the findings, the researcher developed a theory about the experience of first-generation college students in navigating the college admission process. The theory suggested that first-generation college students faced unique challenges in the college admission process due to their lack of knowledge and resources, and that these challenges could be addressed through targeted support programs and resources.
In summary, grounded theory research involves collecting data, analyzing it through constant comparison and memoing, and developing a theory grounded in the data. The resulting theory can help to explain the phenomenon being studied and guide future research and interventions.
The purpose of Grounded Theory is to develop a theoretical framework that explains a social phenomenon, process, or interaction. This theoretical framework is developed through a rigorous process of data collection, coding, and analysis, and is grounded in the data.
Grounded Theory aims to uncover the social processes and patterns that underlie social phenomena, and to develop a theoretical framework that explains these processes and patterns. It is a flexible method that can be used to explore a wide range of research questions and settings, and is particularly well-suited to exploring complex social phenomena that have not been well-studied.
The ultimate goal of Grounded Theory is to generate a theoretical framework that is grounded in the data, and that can be used to explain and predict social phenomena. This theoretical framework can then be used to inform policy and practice, and to guide future research in the field.
Following are some situations in which Grounded Theory may be particularly useful:
Grounded Theory is a qualitative research method that is characterized by several key features, including:
Advantages of Grounded Theory are as follows:
Limitations of Grounded Theory are as follows:
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
Chris Drew (PhD)
Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]
Learn about our Editorial Process
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method that involves the construction of theory from data rather than testing theories through data (Birks & Mills, 2015).
In other words, a grounded theory analysis doesn’t start with a hypothesis or theoretical framework, but instead generates a theory during the data analysis process .
This method has garnered a notable amount of attention since its inception in the 1960s by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss (Corbin & Strauss, 2015).
A central feature of grounded theory is the continuous interplay between data collection and analysis (Bringer, Johnston, & Brackenridge, 2016).
Grounded theorists start with the data, coding and considering each piece of collected information (for instance, behaviors collected during a psychological study).
As more information is collected, the researcher can reflect upon the data in an ongoing cycle where data informs an ever-growing and evolving theory (Mills, Bonner & Francis, 2017).
As such, the researcher isn’t tied to testing a hypothesis, but instead, can allow surprising and intriguing insights to emerge from the data itself.
Applications of grounded theory are widespread within the field of social sciences . The method has been utilized to provide insight into complex social phenomena such as nursing, education, and business management (Atkinson, 2015).
Grounded theory offers a sound methodology to unearth the complexities of social phenomena that aren’t well-understood in existing theories (McGhee, Marland & Atkinson, 2017).
While the methods of grounded theory can be labor-intensive and time-consuming, the rich, robust theories this approach produces make it a valuable tool in many researchers’ repertoires.
Title: A grounded theory analysis of older adults and information technology
Citation: Weatherall, J. W. A. (2000). A grounded theory analysis of older adults and information technology. Educational Gerontology , 26 (4), 371-386.
Description: This study employed a grounded theory approach to investigate older adults’ use of information technology (IT). Six participants from a senior senior were interviewed about their experiences and opinions regarding computer technology. Consistent with a grounded theory angle, there was no hypothesis to be tested. Rather, themes emerged out of the analysis process. From this, the findings revealed that the participants recognized the importance of IT in modern life, which motivated them to explore its potential. Positive attitudes towards IT were developed and reinforced through direct experience and personal ownership of technology.
Title: A taxonomy of dignity: a grounded theory study
Citation: Jacobson, N. (2009). A taxonomy of dignity: a grounded theory study. BMC International health and human rights , 9 (1), 1-9.
Description: This study aims to develop a taxonomy of dignity by letting the data create the taxonomic categories, rather than imposing the categories upon the analysis. The theory emerged from the textual and thematic analysis of 64 interviews conducted with individuals marginalized by health or social status , as well as those providing services to such populations and professionals working in health and human rights. This approach identified two main forms of dignity that emerged out of the data: “ human dignity ” and “social dignity”.
Title: A grounded theory of the development of noble youth purpose
Citation: Bronk, K. C. (2012). A grounded theory of the development of noble youth purpose. Journal of Adolescent Research , 27 (1), 78-109.
Description: This study explores the development of noble youth purpose over time using a grounded theory approach. Something notable about this study was that it returned to collect additional data two additional times, demonstrating how grounded theory can be an interactive process. The researchers conducted three waves of interviews with nine adolescents who demonstrated strong commitments to various noble purposes. The findings revealed that commitments grew slowly but steadily in response to positive feedback, with mentors and like-minded peers playing a crucial role in supporting noble purposes.
Title: A grounded theory of the flow experiences of Web users
Citation: Pace, S. (2004). A grounded theory of the flow experiences of Web users. International journal of human-computer studies , 60 (3), 327-363.
Description: This study attempted to understand the flow experiences of web users engaged in information-seeking activities, systematically gathering and analyzing data from semi-structured in-depth interviews with web users. By avoiding preconceptions and reviewing the literature only after the theory had emerged, the study aimed to develop a theory based on the data rather than testing preconceived ideas. The study identified key elements of flow experiences, such as the balance between challenges and skills, clear goals and feedback, concentration, a sense of control, a distorted sense of time, and the autotelic experience.
Title: Victimising of school bullying: a grounded theory
Citation: Thornberg, R., Halldin, K., Bolmsjö, N., & Petersson, A. (2013). Victimising of school bullying: A grounded theory. Research Papers in Education , 28 (3), 309-329.
Description: This study aimed to investigate the experiences of individuals who had been victims of school bullying and understand the effects of these experiences, using a grounded theory approach. Through iterative coding of interviews, the researchers identify themes from the data without a pre-conceived idea or hypothesis that they aim to test. The open-minded coding of the data led to the identification of a four-phase process in victimizing: initial attacks, double victimizing, bullying exit, and after-effects of bullying. The study highlighted the social processes involved in victimizing, including external victimizing through stigmatization and social exclusion, as well as internal victimizing through self-isolation, self-doubt, and lingering psychosocial issues.
Suggested Title: “Understanding Interprofessional Collaboration in Emergency Medical Services”
Suggested Data Analysis Method: Coding and constant comparative analysis
How to Do It: This hypothetical study might begin with conducting in-depth interviews and field observations within several emergency medical teams to collect detailed narratives and behaviors. Multiple rounds of coding and categorizing would be carried out on this raw data, consistently comparing new information with existing categories. As the categories saturate, relationships among them would be identified, with these relationships forming the basis of a new theory bettering our understanding of collaboration in emergency settings. This iterative process of data collection, analysis, and theory development, continually refined based on fresh insights, upholds the essence of a grounded theory approach.
Suggested Title: “The Role of Social Media in Political Engagement Among Young Adults”
Suggested Data Analysis Method: Open, axial, and selective coding
Explanation: The study would start by collecting interaction data on various social media platforms, focusing on political discussions engaged in by young adults. Through open, axial, and selective coding, the data would be broken down, compared, and conceptualized. New insights and patterns would gradually form the basis of a theory explaining the role of social media in shaping political engagement, with continuous refinement informed by the gathered data. This process embodies the recursive essence of the grounded theory approach.
Suggested Title: “Transforming Workplace Cultures: An Exploration of Remote Work Trends”
Suggested Data Analysis Method: Constant comparative analysis
Explanation: The theoretical study could leverage survey data and in-depth interviews of employees and bosses engaging in remote work to understand the shifts in workplace culture. Coding and constant comparative analysis would enable the identification of core categories and relationships among them. Sustainability and resilience through remote ways of working would be emergent themes. This constant back-and-forth interplay between data collection, analysis, and theory formation aligns strongly with a grounded theory approach.
Suggested Title: “Persistence Amidst Challenges: A Grounded Theory Approach to Understanding Resilience in Urban Educators”
Suggested Data Analysis Method: Iterative Coding
How to Do It: This study would involve collecting data via interviews from educators in urban school systems. Through iterative coding, data would be constantly analyzed, compared, and categorized to derive meaningful theories about resilience. The researcher would constantly return to the data, refining the developing theory with every successive interaction. This procedure organically incorporates the grounded theory approach’s characteristic iterative nature.
Suggested Title: “Coping Strategies of Patients with Chronic Pain: A Grounded Theory Study”
Suggested Data Analysis Method: Line-by-line inductive coding
How to Do It: The study might initiate with in-depth interviews of patients who’ve experienced chronic pain. Line-by-line coding, followed by memoing, helps to immerse oneself in the data, utilizing a grounded theory approach to map out the relationships between categories and their properties. New rounds of interviews would supplement and refine the emergent theory further. The subsequent theory would then be a detailed, data-grounded exploration of how patients cope with chronic pain.
Grounded theory is an innovative way to gather qualitative data that can help introduce new thoughts, theories, and ideas into academic literature. While it has its strength in allowing the “data to do the talking”, it also has some key limitations – namely, often, it leads to results that have already been found in the academic literature. Studies that try to build upon current knowledge by testing new hypotheses are, in general, more laser-focused on ensuring we push current knowledge forward. Nevertheless, a grounded theory approach is very useful in many circumstances, revealing important new information that may not be generated through other approaches. So, overall, this methodology has great value for qualitative researchers, and can be extremely useful, especially when exploring specific case study projects . I also find it to synthesize well with action research projects .
Atkinson, P. (2015). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: Valid qualitative research strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 6 (1), 83-86.
Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide . London: Sage.
Bringer, J. D., Johnston, L. H., & Brackenridge, C. H. (2016). Using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software to develop a grounded theory project. Field Methods, 18 (3), 245-266.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory . Sage publications.
McGhee, G., Marland, G. R., & Atkinson, J. (2017). Grounded theory research: Literature reviewing and reflexivity. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29 (3), 654-663.
Mills, J., Bonner, A., & Francis, K. (2017). Adopting a Constructivist Approach to Grounded Theory: Implications for Research Design. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 13 (2), 81-89.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Home Market Research
In the realm of qualitative research, the grounded theory approach stands as a stalwart methodology that has reshaped how researchers unravel the complexities of the human experience.
This approach, developed by Barney G. Glaser and Anselm L. Strauss in the 1960s, provides a systematic framework for generating theories from empirical data.
Grounded theory methods involve systematically deriving theories from qualitative data, facilitating a deep understanding of complex phenomena. The grounded theory method empowers researchers to construct concepts and theories directly from the data they collect, fostering a comprehensive and contextually rich analysis.
In this blog, we delve into the core principles of the grounded theory approach and explore how platforms like QuestionPro can enhance its application in qualitative research.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research methodology that involves developing theories directly from the data collected during the research process instead of relying on pre-existing theories or hypotheses.
This approach aims to generate insights and understanding about a particular phenomenon by systematically analyzing and coding the data to uncover patterns, relationships, and concepts.
It emphasizes research’s iterative and inductive nature, allowing theories to emerge organically from the data rather than being imposed on it. This methodology is commonly used in social sciences and other fields to explore complex social processes and generate new theories from empirical observations and interviews.
Grounded theory research is particularly well-suited for situations where you want to develop a new theory or gain a deeper understanding of a complex phenomenon that hasn’t been extensively studied before. Here are some scenarios where such theory research can be valuable:
When you’re exploring a new area of research where little prior theory exists, it can help you generate theories and concepts directly from the data.
It can provide insights into the underlying dynamics if you’re studying complex social processes, behaviors, interactions, or cultural phenomena.
When examining a relatively new or rapidly evolving phenomenon, grounded theory can help you uncover the underlying structures and trends driving its emergence.
If you aim to develop a new theoretical framework based on empirical evidence, it provides a systematic approach to theory building grounded in data.
When you want to deeply understand a phenomenon within its specific context, it allows you to capture the nuances and intricacies that more hypothesis-driven methods might miss.
It effectively captures participants’ perspectives and experiences in a detailed and nuanced manner.
It’s useful when you’re working with diverse types of qualitative data, such as interviews, observations, field notes, or textual documents.
Grounded theory allows you to develop insights that contradict or expand upon established knowledge to challenge existing assumptions or theories.
This can be valuable in interdisciplinary research, where you’re attempting to integrate perspectives from multiple disciplines to develop new insights.
In fields like education, healthcare, or social work, where practical solutions are needed, it can help in developing theories that inform real-world applications.
The grounded theory process involves several key steps researchers follow to generate theories from empirical data systematically. While there might be variations and adaptations in different researchers’ approaches, the following steps are commonly associated with the grounded theory methodology:
The foundation of the constructivist grounded theory approach lies in collecting data through methods such as interviews, observations, and document analysis. This raw data serves as the bedrock for theory construction.
Researchers meticulously dissect the data, assigning initial codes to capture the fundamental concepts present. This stage facilitates unbiased exploration, as researchers do not force-fit data into pre-existing categories.
Building upon the initial codes, researchers start categorizing and interlinking them to form more comprehensive themes. The aim is to identify connections and relationships between these categories.
The process evolves further as a core category central to the phenomenon under study emerges. Researchers refine and establish links between this core category and other concepts.
Throughout the journey, researchers consistently compare new data with existing codes and categories, refining their understanding and allowing the theory to evolve organically.
Researchers strategically select new data sources or participants to enrich the theory’s development and validation, ensuring that the existing theory resonates with diverse perspectives.
The journey reaches its zenith with theoretical sensitivity saturation, where new data ceases to alter the theory significantly. This signifies a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon.
Researchers compile their insights into a coherent narrative that encapsulates emerging relationships, patterns, and concepts. This narrative becomes the tangible outcome of the grounded theory study.
Here are some advantages and disadvantages of using grounded theory:
In their study of online community dynamics, the researchers employed grounded theory analysis to uncover emergent patterns of interaction and collaboration among participants. Platforms like QuestionPro offer a range of tools that complement and enhance the grounded theory Approach in qualitative research:
The grounded theory Approach remains a cornerstone in qualitative research, fostering a dynamic interplay between data and emerging theory construction.
QuestionPro’s suite of tools lends a helping hand to researchers embarking on this journey, providing support across data collection, analysis, collaboration, and visualization.
As the landscape of research evolves, the synergy between methodologies like the grounded theory approach and innovative platforms like QuestionPro paves the way for deeper insights into the tapestry of human experiences.
LEARN MORE FREE TRIAL
Aug 27, 2024
Aug 26, 2024
Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service
Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve
Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground
Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention
Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth
Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people
Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone
Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts
Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market
Explore the platform powering Experience Management
Popular Use Cases
Market Research
The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.
Your complete guide to grounded theory research.
11 min read If you have an area of interest, but no hypothesis yet, try grounded theory research. You conduct data collection and analysis, forming a theory based on facts. Read our ultimate guide for everything you need to know.
Grounded theory is a systematic qualitative research method that collects empirical data first, and then creates a theory ‘grounded’ in the results.
The constant comparative method was developed by Glaser and Strauss, described in their book, Awareness of Dying (1965). They are seen as the founders of classic grounded theory.
Research teams use grounded theory to analyze social processes and relationships.
Because of the important role of data, there are key stages like data collection and data analysis that need to happen in order for the resulting data to be useful.
The grounded research results are compared to strengthen the validity of the findings to arrive at stronger defined theories. Once the data analysis cannot continue to refine the new theories down, a final theory is confirmed.
Grounded research is different from experimental research or scientific inquiry as it does not need a hypothesis theory at the start to verify. Instead, the evolving theory is based on facts and evidence discovered during each stage.Also, grounded research also doesn’t have a preconceived understanding of events or happenings before the qualitative research commences.
Free eBook: Qualitative research design handbook
Grounded theory research is useful for businesses when a researcher wants to look into a topic that has existing theory or no current research available. This means that the qualitative research results will be unique and can open the doors to the social phenomena being investigated.
In addition, businesses can use this qualitative research as the primary evidence needed to understand whether it’s worth placing investment into a new line of product or services, if the research identifies key themes and concepts that point to a solvable commercial problem.
There are several stages in the grounded theory process:
The researcher decides what area they’re interested in.
They may create a guide to what they will be collecting during the grounded theory methodology. They will refer to this guide when they want to check the suitability of the qualitative data, as they collect it, to avoid preconceived ideas of what they know impacting the research.
A researcher can set up a grounded theory coding framework to identify the correct data. Coding is associating words, or labels, that are useful to the social phenomena that is being investigated. So, when the researcher sees these words, they assign the data to that category or theme.
In this stage, you’ll also want to create your open-ended initial research questions. Here are the main differences between open and closed-ended questions:
Open-ended questions | Closed-ended questions |
---|---|
Qualitative | Quantitative |
Contextual | Data-driven |
Personalized | Manufactured |
Exploratory | Focused |
These will need to be adapted as the research goes on and more tangents and areas to explore are discovered. To help you create your questions, ask yourself:
Data analysis happens at the same time as data collection. In grounded theory analysis, this is also known as constant comparative analysis, or theoretical sampling.
The researcher collects qualitative data by asking open-ended questions in interviews and surveys, studying historical or archival data, or observing participants and interpreting what is seen. This collected data is transferred into transcripts.
The categories or themes are compared and further refined by data, until there are only a few strong categories or themes remaining. Here is where coding occurs, and there are different levels of coding as the categories or themes are refined down:
During analysis, the researcher will apply theoretical sensitivity to the collected data they uncover, so that the meaning of nuances in what they see can be fully understood.
This coding process repeats until the researcher has reached theoretical saturation. In grounded theory analysis, this is where all data has been researched and there are no more possible categories or themes to explore.
The researcher takes the core categories and themes that they have gathered and integrates them into one central idea (a new theory) using selective code. This final grounded theory concludes the research.
The new theory should be a few simple sentences that describe the research, indicating what was and was not covered in it.
One example of how grounded theory may be used in business is to support HR teams by analyzing data to explore reasons why people leave a company.
For example, a company with a high attrition rate that has not done any research on this area before may choose grounded theory to understand key reasons why people choose to leave.
Researchers may start looking at the quantitative data around departures over the year and look for patterns. Coupled with this, they may conduct qualitative data research through employee engagement surveys , interview panels for current employees, and exit interviews with leaving employees.
From this information, they may start coding transcripts to find similarities and differences (coding) picking up on general themes and concepts. For example, a group of excepts like:
Using open coding, a researcher could compare excerpts and suggest the themes of managerial issues, a culture of long hours and lack of traveling routes at night.
With more samples and information, through axial coding, stronger themes of lack of recognition and having too much work (which led people to working late), could be drawn out from the summaries of the concepts and themes.
This could lead to a selective coding conclusion that people left because they were ‘overworked and under-appreciated’.
With this information, a grounded theory can help HR teams look at what teams do day to day, exploring ways to spread workloads or reduce them. Also, there could be training supplied to management and employees to engage professional development conversations better.
Evaluating qualitative research can be tough when there are several analytics platforms to manage and lots of subjective data sources to compare. Some tools are already part of the office toolset, like video conferencing tools and excel spreadsheets.
However, most tools are not purpose-built for research, so researchers will be manually collecting and managing these files – in the worst case scenario, by pen and paper!
Use a best-in-breed management technology solution to collect all qualitative research and manage it in an organized way without large time resources or additional training required.
Qualtrics provides a number of qualitative research analysis tools, like Text iQ , powered by Qualtrics iQ, provides powerful machine learning and native language processing to help you discover patterns and trends in text.
This also provides you with research process tools:
Market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, qualitative vs quantitative research 13 min read, qualitative research questions 11 min read, qualitative research design 12 min read, primary vs secondary research 14 min read, request demo.
Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?
No products in the cart.
Using grounded theory, you can examine a specific process or phenomenon and develop new theories derived from the collected real-world data and their analysis.
Grounded theory research is an inductive approach in which a theory is developed based on data. This is the opposite of the traditional hypothesis-deductive research approaches where hypotheses are formulated and are then tried to be proved or disproved.
In grounded theory, the process of collecting data, and developing theory is a continuous one and should be incorporated in the research design. The process of collecting and analyzing data is repeated until theoretical saturation is reached or no new insights will be gained from additional data.
In Situational Analysis Extending Grounded Theory with Dr. Adele Clarke, Clarke discusses situational analysis as an extension of grounded theory for analyzing qualitative data including interview, ethnographic, historical, visual, and/or other discursive materials. Clarke describes how it is especially useful for multi-site research, feminist, and critical inquiry. To dive deeper into the messy complexities in data and understand relations among the elements constitutive of the situation, watch Clarke’s webinar Situational Analysis Extending Grounded Theory.
>> View Webinar: Situational Analysis Extending Grounded Theory
The grounded theory approach is a qualitative research methodology that attempts to unravel the meanings of people's interactions, social actions, and experiences. In other words, these explanations are grounded in the participants' own interpretations or explanations.
In 1967, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss published the book, The Discovery Of Grounded Theory which introduced this method. Many disciplines have since used grounded theory, including anthropology, sociology, economics, psychology, and public health.
Qualitative research using grounded theory was regarded as being groundbreaking upon its introduction. By using the inductive methodology, data (such as interviews and observations, and on rare occasions, historical data, archival data, and more) could be analyzed as they are being collected. They sought to move away from the dominant practice in the 1950s and 60s of starting with a theoretical framework which needed to be verified. They turned that practice on its head by starting with the data to develop theory.
Grounded theory has the following salient features:
Begins with data- Researchers using the grounded theory approach typically start with a case study by observing an individual or group in action. Through an analysis of cases, researchers formulate a tentative definition of their concept. An explanation for the construct is later crafted based on this case analysis.
A personal approach- In this method, researchers study participants as they go about their daily activities, observe them interacting with others, conduct individual or group interviews, and ask participants specific questions about their observations, daily lives, experiences, or other sources relevant to the study.
The application of grounded theory qualitative research is a dynamic and flexible way to answer questions that can't be addressed by other research methods.
A grounded theory is often used in cases where there is no existing theory that explains the phenomenon being studied. It is also possible to use it if there is an existing theory, but it is potentially incomplete because the information wasn’t gathered from the group you intend to research.
Check out ScienceDirect's page for more examples on how grounded theory can be applied .
Grounded theory offers various advantages.
By using grounded theory, one can develop theories that are based on observations and interviews with real subjects in real situations. This results in findings that more closely reflect reality. In contrast, other types of research take place in less natural settings, such as focus groups and lab settings.
The premise of grounded theory is that you discover new theories by inductive means. In other words, you don't assume anything about the outcome and aren't concerned about validating or describing it. Instead, you use the data you collect to inform your analysis and your theoretical construct, resulting in new insights.
Analyzing and collecting data go hand in hand. Data is collected, analyzed, and as you gain insight from analysis, you continue gathering more data. In this way, your data collection will be adequate to explain the results of your analysis.
In grounded theory, the outcome is determined primarily by collected data, so findings are tightly tied to those data. It contrasts with other research methods that are primarily constructed through external frameworks or theories that are so far removed from the data.
Because gathering data and analyzing it are closely intertwined, researchers are truly observing what emerges from data. By having a buffer, you avoid confirming preconceived notions about the topic.
An important aspect of grounded theory is that it provides specific strategies for analysis. Grounded theory may be characterized as an open-ended method, but its analysis strategies keep you organized and analytical throughout the research process.
In addition to the multiple advantages of grounded theory listed above, there are a few disadvantages of grounded theory, and qualitative methods in general, that are important to consider.
Grounded theory is often a time-consuming process that involves collecting data from multiple sources, analyzing the data for patterns and themes, and then finally coding the data – all steps that can take significant time if not using qualitative data analysis software like NVivo.
Additional disadvantages in grounded theory include a researcher’s own biases and assumptions which may impact their data analysis and the quality of their data – whether it’s low quality or simply incomplete.
If you’re ready to start using grounded theory, using tools like NVivo can help!
With NVivo, you can analyze interviews (and occasionally survey) data by visually exploring datasets with the Detail View feature. This ability lets you limit the amount of data you’re viewing and filter to help identify patterns in your data.
Additionally, NVivo can help with transcribing, making connections between themes and participants, and keeping your interview data organized. Learn more about how to use NVivo for interview data in Thematic Analysis of Interview Data: 6 Ways NVivo Can Help .
Learn more about how to use NVivo for grounded theory in this paper Using NVivo to Facilitate the Development of a Grounded Theory Project: An Account of a Worked Example and the video below.
Learn more about how to use NVivo for grounded theory >>
Start transforming your qualitative research by requesting a free demo of NVivo today!
Recent Articles
Qualitative grounded theory: advanced data analysis techniques.
Home » Qualitative Grounded Theory: Advanced Data Analysis Techniques
Grounded Theory Analysis emerges as a powerful qualitative methodology that helps researchers uncover underlying patterns within complex data. By systematically coding and categorizing qualitative information, this approach allows for the identification of themes and concepts that may not be immediately evident. Researchers find value in grounded theory as a way to generate theories directly informed by data, creating a more nuanced understanding of the social phenomena being studied.
This analytical framework emphasizes the importance of inductive reasoning, encouraging researchers to remain open to new insights throughout the process. Grounded Theory Analysis not only provides a structured method for analyzing qualitative data but also promotes ongoing interaction between theory and data, ensuring a rich, iterative exploration of research questions. Consequently, understanding grounded theory is essential for anyone involved in qualitative research, as it fosters deeper insights and robust findings.
Grounded Theory Analysis offers a structured approach to data interpretation, allowing researchers to develop theories based on collected data instead of pre-existing hypotheses. This technique emphasizes the importance of gathering and analyzing qualitative data through systematic coding and theoretical sampling. By immersing oneself in the data, researchers can identify recurring themes that emerge organically.
To effectively conduct Grounded Theory Analysis, several key steps are vital. Firstly, open coding initiates the process by breaking down qualitative data into manageable parts, allowing for detailed examination. Next, axial coding helps to connect categories, establishing relationships among them. Lastly, selective coding integrates core themes, culminating in a grounded theory that encapsulates the findings. Each of these steps supports researchers in crafting compelling narratives that reflect the essence of the data, thus enhancing the validity and reliability of their insights. Through this deep dive, one can appreciate how Grounded Theory Analysis transcends mere data collection, transforming it into a dynamic, theory-generating process.
Theoretical sampling is a significant aspect of grounded theory analysis, guiding researchers in data collection. This strategy centers on selecting participants based on their relevance to developing a theory. When examining the qualitative data, researchers look for emerging patterns, ensuring that the sample evolves as the study progresses. This flexibility enables a deeper understanding of the phenomenon being studied.
In practical terms, theoretical sampling involves various stages. First, researchers identify initial participants who can provide rich data relevant to concepts of interest. Next, they analyze the information gathered, which may reveal new variables or categories needing exploration. The process continues as researchers seek out participants who can provide further insights, leading to a comprehensive understanding of the topic. This iterative approach enriches grounded theory analysis, ensuring that findings remain closely aligned with the realities of the studied context.
In Grounded Theory Analysis, coding practices are essential for systematically analyzing qualitative data. Coding involves tagging specific segments of data with labels that represent themes or concepts. This process helps researchers break down complex information, making it easier to identify patterns and develop theories.
The initial coding stage may involve open coding, where researchers note any emerging themes without restrictions. Next, in axial coding, connections between categories are explored, leading to a more nuanced understanding of the data. Finally, in selective coding, researchers focus on integrating and refining these categories to construct a cohesive theory. Effective coding not only facilitates analysis but also enhances the researcher's ability to center the voices of participants, providing richer insights and leading to more robust findings.
Incorporating these coding practices systematically within Grounded Theory Analysis undeniably improves the quality and depth of qualitative research.
Advanced techniques in qualitative grounded theory analysis enhance the depth and richness of data interpretation. These methods allow researchers to derive nuanced insights from qualitative data, facilitating a more profound understanding of participant experiences. The iterative process of grounded theory analysis enables researchers to continuously refine categories, leading to the emergence of themes that capture the essence of the data.
Key techniques include the constant comparative method, which compares new data with existing categories to refine conceptual frameworks. Theoretical sampling is also vital; it involves strategically selecting participants based on emerging findings to deepen understanding. Engaging with existing literature during analysis helps researchers position their findings within broader theoretical contexts. By applying these advanced techniques, researchers can ensure their grounded theory analysis is robust, comprehensive, and responsive to the complexities of qualitative data. This approach ultimately enriches the narrative of the findings, making them more relevant and applicable to real-world settings.
The Constant Comparative Method is a core technique within Grounded Theory Analysis that involves the ongoing comparison between data points to construct a robust understanding of social phenomena. As qualitative researchers collect data, they continuously analyze it against previous data, allowing themes and concepts to emerge organically. This iterative process not only deepens the researcher’s engagement with the material but also enhances the accuracy and richness of the findings.
In practice, the method encourages examining new data in light of existing categories, generating sub-categories, and refining theories as data accrues. Researchers should focus on four key activities: constant comparison of incidents, integration of categories, validation of emerging theories, and seeking out variations in the data. By pursuing these activities, researchers can ensure that their analysis remains dynamic, reflecting the complexities of human experiences in its findings. This method is crucial for developing a well-founded qualitative argument and for understanding the nuanced dynamics within the research context.
Memo-writing serves as an essential analytic tool in Grounded Theory Analysis, facilitating deeper engagement with qualitative data. Through memos, researchers can capture insights, reflections, and emerging themes while iteratively building their understanding of the data. This process not only promotes analytical rigor but also fosters a nuanced perspective on participant narratives.
Effective memo-writing includes three key elements: first, reflective writing, where researchers document their thoughts and feelings about the data collection process; second, thematic exploration, which involves identifying patterns or recurring concepts within the data; and third, methodological notes that capture decisions made throughout the research. These components transform raw data into meaningful insights, guiding researchers in their quest for a comprehensive understanding of the studied phenomena. Ultimately, memo-writing enriches the analytic process and strengthens the foundation for theory development in qualitative research.
In conclusion, Grounded Theory Analysis refines research by grounding findings in empirical data. This approach empowers researchers to derive meaningful insights from qualitative data, enhancing the validity of their conclusions. By focusing on participant experiences, researchers develop frameworks that reflect real-world contexts, making their findings more applicable and relevant.
Furthermore, the iterative process of Grounded Theory fosters continual refinement of research questions and methodologies. As researchers engage with their data, new themes and ideas emerge, leading to deeper understanding. This adaptability transforms initially vague inquiries into rich narratives, ultimately enriching the overall research experience.
On this Page
You may also like, top paid market research companies for high-quality data.
Best advertising company research services in 2024.
Unlock Insights from Interviews 10x faster
Let’s role-play for a minute
Imagine with me—it’s your first day on the job as a UX designer in a completely new industry. You have your shiny new computer, your LinkedIn is updated, and you’re ready to shake things up.
"Welcome aboard," says the friendly product manager, "Hope you’re ready to roll up your sleeves and disrupt the industry. Let me know if you have any questions before we get started. Oh, and by the way, we have more than 20 engineers waiting for your designs for this upcoming sprint, but no rush..."
Chances are if you’re reading this you’ve experienced a similar situation before. As UX designers, our job is to bridge the needs of our users and the business to create the best experience for both. But how do we do that when we’re starting from scratch and know very little about the domain we’re entering? Who are our users? What are their problems? What are their goals?
Abraham Lincoln says it best:
If I only had an hour to chop down a tree, I would spend the first 45 minutes sharpening my axe.
In this case, UX Research is our axe and the tree is our user experience—the better we understand our users and their problems, the easier it will be to address and anticipate their needs. With this, every great product starts with excellent research.
With UX, there are dozens of research methods for discovery, testing, and validation—but what’s the right methodology (i.e., evaluative, generative, explorative, quantitative, qualitative, etc.) to drive our research method selection? In our case, when you’re in a new domain building out foundational research or looking to gather large amounts of raw data from several data sources, one methodology always sticks out —Grounded Theory.
I stumbled across GT nearly four years ago when I was running a research discovery effort for a large fortune 100 client that needed to “start over.” Their previous research had gone stale and they were losing touch with their users and what problems to solve. I figured GT, with its simple bottom-up approach to data-driven theory generation , would be the perfect methodology for the project.
Hopefully, in this article, you’ll see how Grounded Theory can help you build data-driven theories about your users, their environment, and the phenomena (an observable fact or event) as a whole to inform your customer understandings and design decisions moving forward.
'The discovery of theory from data systematically obtained from social research' ( Glaser and Strauss 1967 )
The purpose of GT is to generate theories that emerge from or are ”grounded” in data . It is used to uncover learnings around processes, social relationships, and behaviors of groups.
For example, I work in the insurance industry. When I first entered the industry, I figured price was the driving component behind a business owner’s purchasing behavior. However, after several rounds of interviews, I learned the relationship with the insurance agent is orders of magnitude more important, since the business owner needs to have “peace of mind” that their business is insured appropriately. They wanted a “trusted advisor”, not just an affordable insurance policy.
With GT, we’re tasked with the goal of finding patterns and categories that might emerge from the data rather than making assumptions (“insurance buyers just want the cheapest policy”). The theory needs to be “grounded” in the data, hence “Grounded Theory”.
So then, what is considered “data”? Really anything that comes out of a research method (quantitative or qualitative) should be considered data when developing your theories. Primarily, you’ll want your theories steeped in first-party data (from your interviews, feedback sessions, etc.) but feel free to harden your theories with even third-party data like whitepapers or academic resources.
When you need to familiarize yourself with a new domain or topic and you want to be close to the data
When there is a lack of existing theories or research available
If you’re looking to create theories or insights with a mixed-methods approach (qual/quant)
When collecting a large amount of data
Great for new projects where discovery and exploratory methods are needed
Produces large amounts of data
Provides a “fresh” perspective on deep and rich data surrounding a given research topic
Helps reduce confirmation bias since everything is rooted in data
Once a researcher/designer has a nuanced level of understanding on a topic, they’re enabled to think divergently and creatively
GT is very flexible and the methods employed can change as the research study progresses
If adopted across the organization, GT supports a structured approach to data analysis
Observations/findings are easily traceable and tightly connected to the source data
The process of GT is extremely time consuming and can be difficult to do consistently as more and more data comes in
The methods for data collection and analysis take skill and proper training to perform
With large amounts of data in hand, it can pose problems to manage and analyze consistently
Each research topic has no guaranteed start/end date
Difficulty recruiting for ongoing research
When it comes to GT, a researcher does not just begin with a theory and set out to prove it. Rather, a researcher begins with an area of study and allows relevant data to emerge.
As with most research efforts, GT starts off with a research question—this question helps define the scope (who to talk to and what to ask about) and strategy (what methods to use) around the research topic.
In grounded theory, data collection is exactly the same as traditional qualitative research methods and typically begins with a research question.
After a research question/area of interest has been identified, it’s important to begin your research by taking a few steps back and starting with very broad concepts, more general in your thinking.
Additionally, if you’re familiar with the topic at hand it’s equally important to remove biases and assumptions. To do this effectively, try to adjust your worldview and remove any existing theories you might have so you can evaluate the data with a fresh perspective and allow the world to teach you the words, phrases, and idioms while you’re studying and observing so you can ask the “dumb questions” (“what does that mean? Can you explain…?, etc.”).
Remember, “all is data” so get creative with what data you collect and how.
Recorded in-depth interviews
Observational methods
Focus groups
In-app feedback tools
Customer advisory boards
Product analytics
Note-taking
Coding (and tagging) can simply be defined as the process of breaking down your data and organizing them by codes (or labels) so you can identify themes and causal relationships between disparate points.
By its nature, the process of data collection and analysis in grounded theory is quite flexible and can often be done simultaneously. This type of back and forth is called the “zig-zag approach” to collection and analysis where the researcher is continuously refining their “concepts” and “categories” (we’ll define these in a second) on the subject until there is diminishing returns or “theoretical saturation” (when new data comes in and does not lead to refinement of thinking or new ideas).
When in the data collection phase, thematic analysis tends to go hand-in-hand with grounded theory and is one of my personal favorites when analyzing large amounts of data and setting up a proper UX repository (especially in Dovetail)!
**End Aside**
When analyzing your data, we need to somehow deconstruct it so we can reassemble it into actionable information or findings—we do this by evaluating our data and organizing our findings into concepts and categories.
“Concepts” are your low-level codes, or put simply, the first layer of data you highlight/ tag that you found important. I once asked my mentor—“what should I code?” and she said, “code and tag anything that you might find interesting and that you might want to share with me if we bumped into each other in the hallway...”.
It’s quite simple. Anything that you find interesting is meaningful—tag it!
That’s “concepts” in GT.
Now, “categories” are clustered concepts that have similar ideas (and can come from several data sources). Typically, these are written in the form of insights or themes in my experience.
A key method that’s used in grounded theory is called the “constant comparative” method, which means any findings (concepts, categories, theories, etc.) are constantly compared against each other as new data emerges in order to further refine your interpretations and theories.
As with any process of analysis, it’s important to look back and course-correct. How are things going? Are we learning anything new? Are we surprised by the new data coming in or are we receiving similar answers? Are the existing categories and concepts abundantly supported?
In grounded theory, Glaser and Strauss call this process “theoretical sampling”, and it's a way for researchers to identify a category that might need further research and inquiry.
Glaser and Strauss on theoretical sampling:
“The process of data collection for generating theory whereby the analyst jointly collects, codes, and analyzes his data and decides what data to collect next and where to find them” — Glaser and Strauss (1967)
As you review your concepts and categories over time, your existing research should help direct (or redirect) you as to where to go and what data to collect next.
But how do researchers know when to stop collecting data?
Strauss calls this moment “theoretical saturation.”
“Theoretical saturation: The point in category development at which no new properties, dimensions, or relationships emerge during analysis”
So when the concepts and categories are theoretically saturated and no new concepts are emerging from the data!
Lastly and most importantly, in order to identify a theory that has emerged from the data, you have to have a deep and nuanced understanding of it—Glaser and Strauss call this “theoretical sensitivity.”
Theoretical sensitivity simply means that through the ongoing process of data collection, analysis, and even more collection, researchers become more familiar with the data and are able to unearth insights and evaluate relationships between concepts and categories that lead to relevant theories (or insights).
In grounded theory, most of these theories come from identified categories which are also referred to as “core categories.”
In my experience, writing theories are not as actionable for our needs in the user experience space, therefore, I’ve found that writing your learnings as one of the following can be helpful:
Insight statement
Problem statement
Job-To-Be-Done
Wrangling research data and developing theories surrounding your topic can be overwhelming and difficult. As a researcher who also designs, I’m all for making things easier.
Use GT to organize your data and consistently groom it for structured, deliberate, and insightful theories/learnings. The consistency, clearly defined and organized concepts and categories will help you over the long run! Additionally, as a design manager (who’s currently hiring wink wink ) it’s important to have a consistent process among our UX teams when it comes to data collection and analysis, so when we scale our research efforts, we’re not left with a dumping ground of raw data, rather clearly defined piles of dynamite insights!
So the next time you’re poised with a discovery project or enter a new job in a new industry, give Grounded Theory a try and watch the learnings pile up!
This article covers the very basics of grounded theory, if you’re interested in learning more please check out my full course on UX research and a few of my favorite books . You can also reach out to me any time via LinkedIn .
Written by Brennan Martin , User Experience Lead, Manager, Acrisure. Brennan is a UX designer and researcher with over eight years of experience. He’s worked on various mobile and web applications ranging from enterprise B2B to B2B2C and B2C experiences. He’s known for his strong sense of storytelling and his fearless advocacy for his users and their needs. Brennan’s pathfinding in uncertain situations is well tested and highly structured—with his years of experience leading UX strategy, design thinking workshops and driving Atomic UX Research best practices in large organizations, he seeks to deliver high quality insights with measurable impact. When he’s not out in the field researching or testing new designs, you can find him trying out new restaurants with his wife, hiking the amazing national parks all over the US, or mentoring budding designers though one of his UX research courses.
Decide what to build next, log in or sign up.
Get started for free
Discover the world's research
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
Investigating the effectiveness of endogenous and exogenous drivers of the sustainability (re)orientation of family smes in slovenia: qualitative content analysis approach.
2. literature review, 2.1. legal framework on sustainable corporate governance (with a focus on smes), 2.1.1. corporate sustainability reporting directive, 2.1.2. corporate sustainability due diligence directive, 2.1.3. scope of the csddd for smes, 2.2. drivers of the family businesses’ (re)orientation towards sustainability, 2.3. endogenous drivers, 2.3.1. the protection of sew, 2.3.2. ownership and management composition, 2.3.3. values, beliefs and attitudes of family owner-managers, 2.3.4. transgenerational continuity and long-term orientation, 2.3.5. knowledge of sustainability, 2.4. exogenous drivers, 2.4.1. stakeholders pressure, 2.4.2. the impact of institutional environment and local communities, 3. empirical research, 3.1. institutional context of slovenia, 3.2. research method, 3.3. sampling and data collection, 3.4. data analysis, 4.1. results of the final coding of the family businesses’ sustainability (re)orientation, 4.2. references to responsibility, preserving (natural) environment and sustainability/sustainable development in the analysed statements, 4.3. family businesses with a higher level of sustainability awareness and orientation, 5. discussion, 5.1. sustainability awareness and readiness of investigated family smes to comply with the new eu legal framework, 5.2. the effectiveness of endogenous and exogenous drivers of family businesses’ sustainability (re)orientation, 6. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
No. of Category | Category Name and Its Definition | No. of Subcat. | Subcategory |
---|---|---|---|
C1 | Vision Describe what a firm would like to become. | C1.1 | Reference to sustainability/sustainable development |
C1.2 | Reference to preserving (natural) environment | ||
C1.3 | Reference to a position in market(s) and/or industry | ||
C1.4 | Reference to the characteristics of products | ||
C1.5 | Miscellaneous | ||
C2 | Mission Defines the purpose and reason why a firm exists. | C2.1 | Reference to sustainability/sustainable development |
C2.2 | Reference to preserving (natural) environment | ||
C2.3 | Reference to the characteristics of products | ||
C2.4 | Reference to the customers’ needs | ||
C3 | Goals The result of planned activities, can be quantified or open-ended statement with no quantification. | C3.1 | Reference to sustainability/sustainable development |
C3.2 | Reference to a position in market(s) and/or industry | ||
C3.3 | Miscellaneous | ||
C4 | Values Consider what should be and what is desirable. | C4.1 | Reference to sustainability/sustainable development |
C4.2 | Reference to preserving (natural) environment | ||
C4.3 | Reference to responsibility | ||
C4.4 | Miscellaneous | ||
C5 | Strategies or strategic directions State how a company is going to achieve its vision, mission and goals. | C5.1 | Reference to sustainability/sustainable development |
C5.2 | Reference to preserving (natural) environment | ||
C5.3 | References to (expansion to) new markets | ||
C6 | Specific of functioning Activities, processes, behaviour. | C6.1 | Reference to sustainability/sustainable development |
C6.2 | Reference to preserving (natural) environment | ||
C6.3 | Reference to the characteristics of products | ||
C6.4 | Reference to competitive strengths | ||
C6.5 | Miscellaneous |
Unit of Analysis (A Family Business) | C1 Vision | C2 Mission | C3 Goals | C4 Values | C5 Strategies or Strategic Directions | C6 Specifics of Functioning |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
U1 | C1.1 | C2.1 | C3.2 | C5.1 | ||
U2 | C5.3 | C6.4 | ||||
U3 | C6.2 | |||||
U4 | C2.4 | C3.2 | ||||
U5 | C1.3 | C3.2 | C5.2 | |||
U6 | C1.3 | C2.4 | ||||
U7 | C3.2 | C6.3 | ||||
U8 | C1.1 | C4.3 | C6.1 | |||
U9 | C1.3 | C2.2 | C5.3 | C6.2 | ||
U10 | C1.4 | |||||
U11 | C3.2 | |||||
U12 | C3.2 | C4.2 | C6.2 | |||
U13 | C4.1 | C6.2 | ||||
U14 | C1.2 | C2.3 | C6.4 | |||
U15 | C1.4 | C2.3 | ||||
U16 | C1.1 | C6.1 | ||||
U17 | C6.4 | |||||
U18 | C1.5 | C4.2 | ||||
U19 | C1.2 | C3.3 | C6.2 | |||
U20 | C6.3 | |||||
U21 | C1.3 | C2.4 | C4.2 | |||
U22 | C1.3 | C4.2 | C6.2 | |||
U23 | C1.1 | C4.4 | C5.1 | C6.1 | ||
U24 | C1.3 | C4.3 | C6.4 | |||
U25 | C1.1 | C2.2 | C3.1 | C5.1 | C6.2 | |
U26 | C6.4 | |||||
Family businesses with published statement (number) | 16 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 17 |
Family businesses with reference to sustainability and protection of natural environment, responsibility (number) | 7 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 10 |
U1 | U8 | U23 | U25 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Family name in in the name of a company | no | no | no | no |
Ownership (generation, number of family owners, % of family ownership) | first and second generation (father, two sons), 100% | first generation (founder), 100% | first generation (husband and wife), 100% | first generation (founder), 100% |
Management (generation, number of family managers) | second generation (two sons) | first generation (founder’s wife) | first and second generation (husband, wife, and both children) | first and second generation (founder—father, daughter) |
Size | small | medium-sized | medium-sized | medium-sized |
Main activity and markets | wholesale and retail trade; market: Slovenia | manufacturing; markets: Slovenia, other countries | manufacturing; markets: Slovenia, other countries | manufacturing; markets: Slovenia, other countries |
The year of establishment | 1990 | 1989 | 1995 | 1992 |
Family Name in the Name of a Company | Ownership (Generation, % of Family Ownership) | Management (Generation) | Size | Main Activity | The Year of Establishment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
U2 | no | first and second, 100% | second | small | manufacturing | 1993 |
U4 | yes | third, 100% | third | small | manufacturing | 1992 |
U6 | no | second, 100% | second | small | manufacturing | 1995 |
U7 | yes | first, 100% | first | small | wholesale and retail trade | 1993 |
U10 | no | first, 100% | first | micro | service activities | 2009 |
U11 | no | third, 100% | third | small | wholesale and retail trade | 1960 |
U15 | no | first and second, 100% | first and second | small | agriculture | 1991 |
U17 | no | first, 100% | first and second | micro | agriculture | 2007 |
U20 | yes | first, 100% | first and second | small | manufacturing | 1982 |
U26 | yes | Second, 100% | second | medium-sized | wholesale and retail trade | 1988 |
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Duh, M.; Primec, A. Investigating the Effectiveness of Endogenous and Exogenous Drivers of the Sustainability (Re)Orientation of Family SMEs in Slovenia: Qualitative Content Analysis Approach. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177285
Duh M, Primec A. Investigating the Effectiveness of Endogenous and Exogenous Drivers of the Sustainability (Re)Orientation of Family SMEs in Slovenia: Qualitative Content Analysis Approach. Sustainability . 2024; 16(17):7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177285
Duh, Mojca, and Andreja Primec. 2024. "Investigating the Effectiveness of Endogenous and Exogenous Drivers of the Sustainability (Re)Orientation of Family SMEs in Slovenia: Qualitative Content Analysis Approach" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177285
Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
IMAGES
COMMENTS
Grounded theory is a well-known methodology employed in many research studies. Qualitative and quantitative data generation techniques can be used in a grounded theory study. Grounded theory sets out to discover or construct theory from data, systematically obtained and analysed using comparative analysis. While grounded theory is inherently ...
By studying their actions and words, you're using grounded theory to build an understanding of their behavior. This qualitative method of research focuses on real-life experiences and observations, letting theories emerge naturally from the data collected, like piecing together a puzzle without knowing the final image.
Grounded Theory. Definition: Grounded Theory is a qualitative research methodology that aims to generate theories based on data that are grounded in the empirical reality of the research context. The method involves a systematic process of data collection, coding, categorization, and analysis to identify patterns and relationships in the data.
Strauss and Corbin's 12 publication Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques resulted in a rebuttal by Glaser 13 over their application of grounded theory ... (p. 187). However, Birks and Mills 6 refer to GT as a process by which theory is generated from the analysis of data. Theory is not discovered; rather ...
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method that involves the construction of theory from data rather than testing theories through data (Birks & Mills, 2015). In other words, a grounded theory analysis doesn't start with a hypothesis or theoretical framework, but instead generates a theory during the data analysis process.
The logic of grounded theory. Glaser and Strauss (Citation 1967) developed grounded theory by explaining the methods they used to construct their remarkable qualitative studies of death and dying in hospitals (Glaser & Strauss, Citation 1965, Citation 1968).In this methodological treatise, they introduced the innovative and systematic strategy of simultaneous data collection and analysis.
The grounded theory Approach remains a cornerstone in qualitative research, fostering a dynamic interplay between data and emerging theory construction. QuestionPro's suite of tools lends a helping hand to researchers embarking on this journey, providing support across data collection, analysis, collaboration, and visualization.
Grounded theory is a systematic methodology that has been largely applied to qualitative research conducted by social scientists.The methodology involves the construction of hypotheses and theories through the collecting and analysis of data. [1] [2] [3] Grounded theory involves the application of inductive reasoning.The methodology contrasts with the hypothetico-deductive model used in ...
The Third Edition of Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory inspires a new generation of qualitative researchers in both the art and science of doing qualitative research analysis. Highly accessible in their approach, authors Juliet Corbin and the late Anselm Strauss (a founder of grounded theory) provide a step-by-step guide to the research ...
Qualitative data analysis varies by methodology. Grounded theory builds systematic theoretical statements inductively from the coding and analysis of data, and the subsequent development and refinement of conceptual categories which are tested and re-tested in further data collection. Unlike studies that involve completion of data collection ...
Grounded theory is a systematic qualitative research method that collects empirical data first, and then creates a theory 'grounded' in the results. The constant comparative method was developed by Glaser and Strauss, described in their book, Awareness of Dying (1965). They are seen as the founders of classic grounded theory.
The grounded approach of any research would require the reporting of a lengthy presentation of qualitative data and analysis, and a constant comparison between the different emerging categories long before the reader would have the opportunity to learn about the theoretical context of the research and its potential contributions.
An Overview of Grounded Theory in Qualitative Research. Published: Dec. 1, 2023. Using grounded theory, you can examine a specific process or phenomenon and develop new theories derived from the collected real-world data and their analysis. Grounded theory research is an inductive approach in which a theory is developed based on data.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research methodology aimed at generating theories based on data collected from participants. This approach emphasizes the importance of understanding a phenomenon through the lens of those directly experiencing it, making it particularly valuable for social sciences and health research.
The goal of a grounded theory qualitative study is to build substantive theory that is "grounded" in the data; this theory is typically localized, dealing with a particular real-world situation or complex setting.3 Grounded theory was first launched in 1967 as a viable such disciplines as health sciences and education.2
In a grounded theory inquiry, following collection of qualitative data often via interviews or observations, data analysis commences with coding whereby the researcher breaks the data into parts to identify and name concepts perceived to fit with the datum (Duchscher & Morgan, 2004; Mills et al., 2006a; Wuest, 2012).
Grounded Theory Analysis emerges as a powerful qualitative methodology that helps researchers uncover underlying patterns within complex data. By systematically coding and categorizing qualitative information, this approach allows for the identification of themes and concepts that may not be immediately evident.
Grounded theory provides a framework for surfacing insights from a large range of data sources. Whether you're aware of it or not, you've most likely used Grounded theory methodology and methods in your day-to-day UX practices. When attempting to generate theories from your qualitative research data, GT is widely seen as the "go-to ...
Grounded theory is on e of the data collection approach in qualitative research. methods which is totally based on data rather than try to em erge theory from data. There are b ulk of books and ...
Understanding the differences between grounded theory and qualitative content analysis helps you choose the right approach for your research. Both methods analyze textual data but have different purposes and results. This article explores these differences, highlighting the strengths and uses of these popular qualitative research methods.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research analysis that systematically collects and analyzes data to develop a new theory on human behavior in social welfare perceptions.
Grounded theory is well utilised in qualitative research for building theoretical understanding of complex social processes. Grounded theory data analysis strategies can be used with different types of data, including secondary data. Despite the potential advantages of secondary data, it is rarely used for grounded theory studies, largely due ...
A qualitative research methodology was adopted for the study through the grounded theory approach. It utilized grounded theory as a research design and interpretive paradigm to guide the researcher.
This paper demonstrates the potential usefulness of the NVivo7 software for developing grounded theory through semantic analysis and for making grounded theory more accessible to students and researchers. Use of qualitative data analysis software early in the research process can impact research design, including the creation of interview ...
Specifically, while Huang et al. use an inductive approach based on a grounded theory approach to analyse secondary data, in their study entitled 'A configurational perspective on design elements and user governance engagement in blockchain platforms,' Zhang and Ramesh use an abductive approach to engage in the dialogue between the ...
Fuzzy profiles: Comparing and contrasting latent profile analysis and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis for person-centered research. Organizational Research Methods, 21: 877-904. Google Scholar; Gigerenzer, G. 2018. Statistical rituals: The replication delusion and how we got there.
designs: basic qualitative research, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and qualitative case study that are commonly used in the social sciences and HRD. To that end, students will read textbook ... Using qualitative data analysis software to support digital research workflows. Human Resource Development Review, 22(1), 139-148. https ...
Due to the exploratory nature of our research, we applied a qualitative case study research method where the qualitative content analysis was used in the process of analysing data. Content analysis is often applied in the research on environmental and sustainability reporting [10,29] and we find it as an adequate approach for addressing the ...