Grounded Theory typically asked about the experiences of the people being interviewed, and it begins with as few assumptions as possible. So, in my opinion, it is a poor fit to your specific goals.

Too often, people start with the idea of doing GT because it is such a well-known approach. Instead, what would often be preferable would be to use a set of open-ended, semi-structured interviews and analyze them with thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Some version of this "generic" approach is by far the most way of doing qualitative research, but it is less prominent because it doesn't have a specific name or label in the way that Grounded Theory does.

My work, over the past decade and 1/2 has been based on "grounded theory" related to my (new) topic, "Missed, Hidden and Denied" history, in the context of real local conflict both in CA and in Alabama. My original, doctoral work related to the "New Jim Crow" the school-to-jail pipeline, and school discipline. I became a discipline hearing officer and administrator for a rural CA school district. In CA as an educator, I've experienced considerable "deception" because of the "silencing" of important leaders and events - thus a "fraudulent" narrative of regional history. History that speaks to some present conflicts and controversies related to racism, the "cult of the lost cause" and the national politics moving backwards toward the 1850s anti-immigrant sentiments. In terms of real lived experience, I have been under attack personally as an advocate for civil rights and environmental protection as the President of a John Muir group located in a rural part of CA near Yosemite. We've brought a genuine grand jury investigation against a 'right wing" supervisor who pushed through a "non-sanctuary" county resolution and who personally attacked a teacher who I mentored in a local school because his wife is (Mexican-Indio) Latina and a dreamer, with a college degree from a CA State University a very complicated and disturbing story. New grounded theory research in the works. In Alabama, my research relates to the racism exposed during hurricane Katrina as I began working with a teacher mentor I'd had as a young man in the 60's with a Civil Rights experience in the Black Belt Region of Alabama, near Selma. Both grounded theory (related) articles are now published. (1) Chapter 38, pp. 729-749. "Searching for Social Justice: An Examination of the Views of Alternative School Educators in the San Joaquin Valley of CA" (2014), In: Spinger International Handbooks of Education, International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Social (In) Justice (vol 2) Ira Bogotch & Carolyn M. Shields, Editors. (2) Chapter 1, pp. 1-47. "More Than Race: The "Full Employment" Civil Rights Work of Robert Brown, Alabama's First Black School Superintendent" (2018) In: Southern Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the South" New Series: Vol. XXV, No. 1, Spring/Summer 2018, Published by the Southern Studies Institute. I'm a recently retired "teacher" and educator in CA and in coming back home to CA after 30+ years in the South was surprised to learn how the racism and anti-Jewish, KKK related movements I'd witnessed and experienced in the South during the Civil Rights era, had spread across America to the very place I finished my education and teaching career after completion of a PhD at the University of New Orleans.

Dear Prof David L Morgan,

Thank you very much for your feedback. Yes, many newcomers have difficulty with the GT research method. And mostly this difficulty is related to preconceived ideas, literature review prior to data collection, constant comparative analysis (in particular the joint data analysis and theoretical sampling concepts) for theory generation.

This discussion however is triggered by an emerging concern arising from a case of an Academic who specialises in gender issues, proclaiming rights of women from a certain group of the society. The concepts 'Fake' and 'Deception' are abstracted from the Academic's actions behind the scene.

The case piques my interest and the aim is discover to what extent these concepts have been studied and within what context.

As it is these abstractions (Fake/Fraud/Hypocrite/Deception) are just codes. It will be interesting to see (1) how these codes have been used in past research and (2) whether current readers have experiences/observations that can be abstracted using similar codes.

Thank you

Misna

Dear Dr Monty Thornburg,

Thank you very much for the extensive sharing. Although familiar with racism from the context of deficit thinking, your work will add to my perspective about how these concepts have found their way into your issue.

I must confess that I will have to explore your work in greater depth to be able to put out a better response to your sharing.

Please give me time and I'll be back.

Thank you

Misna

I do not know of any version of Grounded Theory where you enter the field with "codes" already in mind. Codes are supposed to emerge from your encounters with the data, not guide your data collection from the start.

Dear Prof David L Morgan

"Codes are supposed to emerge from your encounters with the data".

True Prof. Thank you very much for highlighting this aspect of the GT method.

I must have not explained it well.

As I have indicated in my response, the 'Codes' emerged from my observation of actions and incidents involving a professional. In other words the codes are abstractions from real data.

Thank you

Misna

In the context of my research that included, historical analysis, literature review, direct "grounded theory" experience, tied to other forms of research; "deception" in the form of "silencing" of any critique beyond "acceptable norms" was often experienced. In one incident, for example, a very high ranking Judge in CA gave a speech to a large audience of educators about how "privatization" and conservative fiscal policy harmed vulnerable children, (homeless, foster, abused) from receiving appropriate legal representation. In the context of the "Searching for Social Justice" paper, I found that even this highest of possible spokes person, was "silenced" and thus, "deception, and hypocrisy" did emerge in the lived, Grounded Theory process. Out of respect for the process, and confidentiality, I modified the potential impact of the speech. Other similar experience in a different context with "Academic Contributors" (in a rural Southern context) in writing Robert Brown's biographic/education paper. From an ethical position, CRITIQUE questions ask: Who controls? Who legitimates? Who defines? ... Borrowed from an Ethical School Model: Starratt, R. J. (1994) "Building an Ethical School" ... Typically in my "Grounded Theory" practice, questions related to CRITIQUE as compared to those asked about CARING or JUSTICE for example, were silenced, and thus "deception" became an issue.

Dear Dr Monty Thornburg ,

Excellent. You have summarised a very clear analytical GT MEMO for us. I will now create a list of how a code under discussion is being used in the abstraction of a piece of data.

1- Deception - "deception" in the form of "silencing" of any critique beyond "acceptable norms" was often experienced ... Typically in my "Grounded Theory" practice, questions related to CRITIQUE as compared to those asked about CARING or JUSTICE for example, were silenced, and thus "deception" became an issue. (Contributor: Dr Monty Thornburg).

2- Fake and Deception - This discussion however is triggered by an emerging concern arising from a case of an Academic who specialises in gender issues, proclaiming rights of women from a certain group of the society. The concepts 'Fake' and 'Deception' are abstracted from the Academic's actions behind the scene. Fake is a concept that is directly linked to 'Munafiq', an Arabic concept denoting actions of individuals who are described as follows:

How to recognize hypocrites: four characteristics (Hadith Sahih Bukhari) 1.    When given a trust they betray it. 2.    When they speak they lie 3.    When they promise they break it 4.    When they argue they are unjust

Thus in the case that I am alluding to, FAKE (MUNAFIQ) arises from BETRAYAL of TRUST, and DECEPTION through hiding of the truth and lying.

(Contributor: Dr Misnaton Rabahi)

Looking forward to more contributions to this discussion.

Misna

We avoid substantive literature review prior to data collection. For Glaser, the literature contributes to data during the constant comparative method. Based upon this, let me share a study on the language of Deceptive Denial. Besides observable actions, texts (spoken and written) provide data for deception analysis.

Source: Mohammed Ali & Timothy Levine (2008). The language of truthful and deceptive denials and confessions. Communication Reports 21(2):82-91. DOI: 10.1080/08934210802381862

Article The Language of Truthful and Deceptive Denials and Confessions

Abstract:

This study examined differences in language usage as a function of message veracity and speech act type. A quasi-experiment crossed truthful and deceptive messages with confessions and denials in an induced cheating situation. Transcribed messages were analyzed with Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software. Relative to honest participants, liars exhibited fewer negative emotions, less discrepancy, fewer modal verbs, more modifiers, and they spoke longer. Denials, relative to confessions, were characterized by shorter sentences, more negations, greater discrepancy, fewer past tense verbs, and more present tense verbs. The results are inconsistent with previous findings, suggesting a lack of cross-situational diagnostic utility. (For full text, please refer to the above cited source of the article).

Memo 1: My data indicate that one-word denials in text messages involving deception are prominent. These include the 'haha' (laugh) strategy. Another common strategy is the use of questions feigning ignorance, with the intent of invoking elaboration. (I just hope that the article will not help make a better liar out of those who are already into it).

Memo 2: Another indicator of deception in the the data is how an individual (A) talks TO a person (B) out of personal/professional needs and how that individual talks ABOUT the same person to another (C). The issue of deceptive academics is crucial as it reflects the moral and ethical dimension of leadership in learning. Beyond the paper qualifications, students guided by such academics are at risk of consuming 'Fake' knowledge and transferring the same into their future.