Grounded Theory

History

Glaser and Strauss' publication of The Discovery of Grounded Theory in 1967 offered an elegant, yet rigorous, alternative to the then dominant quantitative research tradition in the social sciences, integrating theory and research in the process. This alternative, with its variants, has become perhaps the most widely used qualitative methodology, yielding rich bodies of literature in disciplines as diverse as sociology and nursing, communications and education, informatics and art. Although Grounded Theory is, at heart, fairly straightforward, there are varying emphases in Glaser and Strauss' work, revisions and further developments by them and their students and claims of Grounded Theory for work that incorporates only some of the relevant strategies. The possibilities can be confusing, so that Grounded Theory is both widely used and widely misconstrued. Despite differences and disagreements, grounded theorists come together on core principles and share fundamental strategies. Grounded theorists share a commitment to constructing theory through rigorously working their data rather than beginning with existing theory, focusing on process and using logic that is distinct from that of quantitative approaches. The fundamental strategies that they use to build theory include early and ongoing simultaneous analysis and collection of data, constant comparative methods, theoretical sampling, multiple stages of data coding and memo writing at multiple stages and levels of analysis. These strategies do not follow a linear process, but they are iterative and interwoven.

The rich diversity amongst grounded theorists began with Glaser and Strauss themselves, with Glaser quantitatively trained and Strauss influenced by the Chicago School. As originally developed, Grounded Theory was realist and objectivist, even positivist or neo-positivist. The reality of the social world was seen as unproblematic, as was the neutral stance of the researcher, whose task it was to ‘discover’ theory to explain that world. The inductive logic of the approach called for working without preconceived theory, which Glaser emphasized more strongly in his later work. Strauss and Juliet Corbin brought a more post-positivist and subjectivist sensibility to Grounded Theory with their recognition that participants bring to the table subjective understandings of the world which complicate, but do not eliminate, the goal of developing empirically Grounded Theory. They elaborated analytic techniques to facilitate this effort. Many, including action researchers, have welcomed the concrete, structured approach of this elaboration and find it useful for legitimizing their work for funding agencies, policymakers and the like. Kathy Charmaz broke away from variations on objectivist, positivist approaches with her constructivist (also called constructionist) Grounded Theory. From this stance, research data is not collected per se but is constructed through interaction with participants. Meanings of data are not inherent, to be discovered, but are formed through the simultaneous and ongoing data analysis and collection. Although this does not go as far towards inclusion as does full participatory research, it explicitly incorporates participants' voices in the theory generated. In constructivist research, the focus is on the phenomenon under investigation. Research methods are tools in a reflective process, guidelines rather than standardized procedures. Charmaz advocates attending to injustice in Grounded Theory work, a clear point of connection to much action research.

...