QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

1. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS GROUNDED THEORY

2. I. GROUNDED THEORY OVERVIEW A. Qualitative approach to theory-building 1. Developed by sociologists Barney Glaser & Anselm Strauss. 2. Works to establish theory from data (instead of applying theoretical frameworks or models to studied phenomenon) 3. Propositions arise from data, untainted by previous theory 4. A systematic generation of theory using both inductive & deductive thinking

3. Grounded Theory Overview, con’t. • 5. More generative than descriptive • 6. For Glaser, a general method, applicable to any type of research (quantitative or qualitative • 7. “GT is multivariate. It happens sequentially, subsequently, simultaneously, serendipitously, & scheduled“ (Glaser, 1998)

4. Grounded Theory Overview, con’t. • B. Goals/Purposes of Grounded Theory (GT) • 1. To formulate hypotheses based on conceptual ideas • a. Generated by constantly comparing conceptualized data on different levels of abstraction • b. Contains deductive steps that permit others to test hypotheses

5. Grounded Theory Overview, con’t. • 2. To discover the participants’ main concern(s) • a. Keep asking "What’s going on?“ "What is the main problem of the participants?” & “How are they trying to solve it?“ • b. These questions answered by the core variable, its subcores & properties, as go through data

6. Grounded Theory Overview, con’t. • C. Features of GT • 1. Emergent theory “grounded in” relationships between data & categories into which coded • 2. Categories develop via ongoing process of comparing units of data with each other (the constant-comparative method) • 3. Codes, categories & category definitions continually change while in the field

7. Grounded Theory Overview, con’t. • 4. Does not aim for "truth" but to conceptualize what's going on by using empirical data • a. Results of GT are not to report statistically significant probabilities • b. Instead, develop a set of probability statements about the relationship between concepts, or an integrated set of conceptual hypotheses developed from empirical data (Glaser 1998)

8. Grounded Theory Overview, con’t. 5. Judge validity by fit, relevance, workability, & modifiability a. Fit is how closely concepts fit with the incidents they are representing b. Relevance deals with the real concerns of participants –not only of academic interest c. Has workability when explains how the problem is being solved by participants d. Is modifiable when new relevant data is compared to existing data

9. II. GROUNDED THEORY • A. Four stages of analysis: • 1. Codes--Identifying anchors (words, themes, other patterns) that allow key aspects of the data to be gathered • 2. Concepts--Collections of codes of similar content that allows the data to be grouped • 3. Categories--Broad groups of similar concepts used to generate a theory • 4. Theory--Collection of explanations about the subject of the research

10. Grounded Theory, con’t. B. Coding 1. Researcher observes, holds conversations (informal interviews) & more structured interviews 2. After each event, write up field notes 3. Codes emerge early, from firsthand contact with the evidence 4. From concepts, categories are formed, which form basis for theory creation (aka a reverse engineered hypothesis)

11. Grounded Theory, con’t. • 5. Two basic types of initial coding • a. Open coding is initial, unrestricted coding of data • 1) Goal is to “open up” inquiry • 2) Go through texts line-by-line, categorizing chunks of data • 3) Key is mental openness & curiosity • 4) Mostly about labeling & categorizing of phenomena

12. Grounded Theory, con’t. b. In-vivo coding involves coding terms used by social actors for phenomenon, events, etc. c. Both occur at same time & are tentative 6. Useful to create a codebook, or tool for cataloguing category definitions, etc. 7. Coding a tedious process, but essential as the quality of categories & theories depends on the quality of the coding

13. Grounded Theory, con’t. 8. All is data/Source data for coding a. Examine everything that comes one’s way in a certain area b. Not just interviews or observations, but also anything that generates concepts for the emerging theory c. Includes lectures, seminars, meeting minutes, other documents, newspaper articles, books, public records, videos, photographs, etc.

14. Grounded Theory, con’t. d. Also from consultation with others as well as own knowledge of the subject, etc. e. Use field notes, logs, diaries, etc. f. More data leads to better categories, theories & conclusions g. However, the more data one has, the more time & effort required to analyze h. What is “enough” data subject to debate; may be constrained by the time & resources available

15. Grounded Theory, con’t • 9. Use a “constant-comparative process” to discover patterns or themes in the data • a. Key points marked with a series of possible codes extracted from text (often initially listed in the margins) • b. Compare each code with another to see what “bin” it belongs into • c. Codes are grouped into similar concepts to make them more workable • d. Begin to see how categories relate & are distinguished from each other

16. Grounded Theory, con’t. 10. Memoing a. Notetaking that occurs during coding b. Can lead to discovery of categories C. Identifies concepts, half-formed ideas, notes, & other thinking to make initial sense of the data d. Since can come up with ideas at the most inopportune moments, should always carry note-taking equipment everywhere

17. Grounded Theory, con’t. • 11. Sorting or data ordering • a. Data can be sorted at any time to find relationships between codes & categories • b. Items may be moved around (manually or via software) to form clusters that allow new relationships to be found • c. “Category folders”' may be kept, containing clippings & other material on items that support a single category

18. Grounded Theory, con’t. • C. Categories • 1. Critical aspect of coding is the identification & naming of categories • 2. Categories can also include sub-categories • 3. Categories can include • a. Contextual conditions • b. Properties • c. Interactions

19. Grounded Theory, con’t. • d. Strategies & tactics • e. Actions • f. Consequences of actions • 4. Core category—the central code or principle round which other codes cluster • a. Can have one or more core categories • b. The main theme of the situation or a central problem/issue for people involved • c. Gives central meaning to the conclusions of the research

20. Grounded Theory, con’t. • 5. Characteristics of core categories: • a. Central, with many relationships to other categories • b. Easy to relate to other codes & categories • c. Appear frequently in the data • d. Support emerging theories • e. Move ideas forward as links & more meaning is uncovered

21. Grounded Theory, con’t. • 6. Naming of categories important • 1. Influences thinking & discussion about the category • 2. Names have previous meanings, so their choice should be made carefully • For example, “rain,” “raining,” & “precipitation” connote different things for people. Additional words may create more precision (e.g. “heavy rain” or “sudden showers”)

22. Grounded Theory, con’t. • D. Next stages are integration & dimensionalization • 1. Reshape categories to provide deeper meanings • 2. Integration depends on Axial Coding (Strauss) • a. Create new set of codes to make connections between categories

23. Grounded Theory, con’t. • b. Strauss & Corbin (1990)’s Paradigm Model for Axial Coding: • 1) Causal conditions • 2) Contextual factors • 3) Actions & interactions strategies in response to a phenomenon • 4) Intervening conditions that assist or hinder actions & interactions • 5) Consequences of actions & interactions

24. Grounded Theory, con’t. • 3. Dimensionalization one of final steps in coding, categorizing, & conceptual development • a. Involves identifying properties of categories & constructs • b. Try to find key variations (or dimensions) • c. Examine attributes of categories & construct within these dimensions

25. Grounded Theory, con’t. E. As one codes, theoretical propositions begin to emerge (the “theory implicit in the data”) 1. A difference between “emergence” & “forcing” (Glaser argues this occurs with more traditional hypothesis testing) 2. Since both method & theory are emergent, there is little literature review in the traditional sense

26. Grounded Theory, con’t. • 3. Theoretical Saturation (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) • a. New data adds very little value • b. About as far as one can go with coding & organizing • c. No new codes or categories are being identified • d. Further analysis used to test & support the identified theory

27. Grounded Theory, con’t. F. Further testing of GT through Theoretical Sampling a. Selection of data & cases for exploration based on one or more of these purposes:  1) To extend the emerging theory 2) To replicate previous cases to test the emerging theory 3) To extend the emerging theory by choosing a polar opposite case

28. Grounded Theory, con’t. • b. Types of data selected in theoretical sampling often needs to be varied • 1) Based on “slices of data” (samples of many different sources & kinds of data) • 2) Avoid focusing on one area to the exclusion of many others

29. III. CRITIQUES OF GROUNDED THEORY. • A. Criticism of GT: • 1. Status as theory --is what is produced really theory? • 2. Notion of “ground”--why is an idea of “grounding” one's findings important in qualitative inquiry & what are they “grounded” in? • 3. Possible problems of preconceptions in the collection & analysis of data • 4. Ironically criticized as being too formulaic instead of being open & creative in interpretations