Grounded theory is a systematic methodology that has been largely applied to qualitative research conducted by social scientists.
Glaser had a background in positivism, which helped him develop a system of labeling for the purpose of coding study participants' qualitative responses.
[12] Grounded theory constructs symbolic codes based on categories emerging from recorded qualitative data.
[10] According to Milliken and Schreiber, another of the grounded theorist's tasks is to understand the socially-shared meanings that underlie individuals' behaviors and the reality of the participants being studied.
[13] A goal of the researcher employing grounded theory methods is that of generating concepts that explain the way people resolve their central concerns regardless of time and place.
The results of grounded theory research are not reported in terms of statistically significant findings although there may be probability statements about the relationship between concepts.
According to Ralph, Birks, and Chapman field notes can come from informal interviews, lectures, seminars, expert group meetings, newspaper articles, Internet mail lists, even television shows, conversations with friends etc.
A popular type of core variable can be theoretically modeled as a basic social process that accounts for most of the variation in change over time, context, and behavior in the studied area.
Theoretical memos can be anything written or drawn in the context of the constant comparative method, an important component of grounded theory.
They examine relationships between concepts with the help of fourfold tables, diagrams, figures, or other means generating comparative power.
The researcher is encouraged to register ideas about the ongoing study that eventually pop up in everyday situations, and awareness of the serendipity of the method is also necessary to achieve good results.
Building on the work of sociologist Robert K. Merton,[24] his idea of serendipity patterns has come to be applied in grounded theory research.
Merton and Barber further develop the idea of serendipity as scientific "method," as contrasted with purposeful discovery by experiment or retrospective prophecy.
Most books on grounded theory do not explain what methodological details should be included in a scholarly article; however, some guidelines have been suggested.
Talking about the grounded theory should be restricted to persons capable of helping the researcher without influencing their final judgments.
In The Discovery of Grounded Theory, Glaser and Strauss[7] advanced the view that, prior to conducting research, investigators should come to an area of study without any preconceived ideas regarding relevant concepts and hypotheses.
[17] Glaser raised the issue of the use of a literature review to enhance the researchers' "theoretical sensitivity," i.e., their ability to identify a grounded theory that is a good fit to the data.
He suggested that novice researchers might delay reading the literature to avoid undue influence on their handling of the qualitative data they collect.
Over time, Glaser and Strauss came to disagree about methodology and other qualitative researchers have also modified ideas linked to grounded theory.
[28] In 1990, Strauss, together with Juliet Corbin, published Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques.
Grounded theory methods, according to Glaser, emphasize induction or emergence, and the individual researcher's creativity within a clear stagelike framework.
The postmodern critique of qualitative research had weakened its legitimacy and narrative analysts criticized grounded theory methodology for fragmenting participants' stories.
[39][40][41][42] Critical realism (CR) is a philosophical approach associated with Roy Bhaskar, who argued for a structured and differentiated account of reality in which difference, stratification, and change are central.
As Gibbs points out, the process of grounded theory can be and has been applied to a number of different disciplines, including medicine, law, and economics.
Rather than being limited to a particular discipline or form of data collection, grounded theory has been found useful across multiple research areas.
Although the constructs in a grounded theory are appropriately abstract (since their goal is to explain other similar phenomenon), they are context-specific, detailed, and tightly connected to the data.
[citation needed] Parsimony refers to a heuristic often used in science that suggests that when there are competing hypotheses that make the same prediction, the hypothesis that relies on the fewest assumptions is preferable.
[51][52] The authors just cited suggest that it is impossible to free oneself of preconceptions in the collection and analysis of data in the way that Glaser and Strauss assert is necessary.
Engaged theory locates analytical processes within a larger theoretical framework that specifies different levels of abstraction, allowing investigators to make claims about the wider world.
They write that in comparison to grounded theory, thematic analysis is freer because it is not linked to any preexisting framework for making sense of qualitative data.