If you are using grounded theory to extract patterns from your data and you find data that correlates with pre existing theories, is it acceptable to add them to your results and section, or should they be confined entirely to a literature review section?
Can you embed portions of your literature review throughout the paper when relevant, or must they stay confined to the literature review section?
If you feel there are any papers that represent the best way to organize this and maintain stylistic conventions, please feel free to share.
Hello Samantha,
it depends on several things, including who is funding the research, where you intend to publish and your epistemological stand point. See Ramalho et al, 2015 Article Literature Review and Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology
In classic GT, the lit review is supposedly done later in analytic process and material is taken up in discussion section. Meanwhile, even inter-disciplinary journals may retain 'quant' leanings so GT articles often follow the prevailing format with lit review comprising or coming after intro or reflected in background, methods and discussion sections e.g. Pitney & Ehlers, 2004, Article A Grounded Theory Study of the Mentoring Process Involved Wi...
In studies taking a social construction or post-modern stand point, the methods of grounded theory, when/if applied, become part of an analytic strategy for theorizing about emergent phenomena rather than an approach to formal theory-building (see e.g. Adele Clarke - situational analysis). Sometimes GT may be applied as part of a mixed qualitative method project e.g. Yukawa, 2005, Story-lines: A case study of online learning using narrative analysis at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.70.4064&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Reports /articles from such studies may use a more narrative structure (beginning, middle and end) but, in any format, researcher presence, transparency and accountability is emphasized in the write-up.
So, literature drawn on to identify the gaps (silences) and contradictions that underlie the researcher's question(s) and inform selection of sensitizing concepts (see Glen Bowen, https://sites.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_3/HTML/bowen.html) would be cited in the 'beginning' text. Any other literature used to help explore interpretations and justifications, i.e. 'reflected on' during thematic analyses of 'primary data' (forming the 'middle') are referenced there.
Depending on topic, question, and overall strategy, documents, academic studies and other texts could also feature as primary data. But I would say this is more likely for social worlds, discourse or narrative analysis ( see Adele Clarke - situational analysis).
regards and luck,
Hello,
The following links can hopefully help you with what you are looking for:
1) ueberfachliche-kompetenzen.ethz.ch/dopraedi/pdfs/.../guidelines_review_article.pdf
2) journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149
3) https://www2.le.ac.uk/projects/oer/oers/ssds/oers/research.../Research%20skillscg.pdf
4) https://www.kth.se/polopoly_fs/1.../Menu/.../column.../Litterarurstudie-bookletEng.pdf
Lot of luck with your research,
R. Biria
Hello Samantha,
it depends on several things, including who is funding the research, where you intend to publish and your epistemological stand point. See Ramalho et al, 2015 Article Literature Review and Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology
In classic GT, the lit review is supposedly done later in analytic process and material is taken up in discussion section. Meanwhile, even inter-disciplinary journals may retain 'quant' leanings so GT articles often follow the prevailing format with lit review comprising or coming after intro or reflected in background, methods and discussion sections e.g. Pitney & Ehlers, 2004, Article A Grounded Theory Study of the Mentoring Process Involved Wi...
In studies taking a social construction or post-modern stand point, the methods of grounded theory, when/if applied, become part of an analytic strategy for theorizing about emergent phenomena rather than an approach to formal theory-building (see e.g. Adele Clarke - situational analysis). Sometimes GT may be applied as part of a mixed qualitative method project e.g. Yukawa, 2005, Story-lines: A case study of online learning using narrative analysis at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.70.4064&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Reports /articles from such studies may use a more narrative structure (beginning, middle and end) but, in any format, researcher presence, transparency and accountability is emphasized in the write-up.
So, literature drawn on to identify the gaps (silences) and contradictions that underlie the researcher's question(s) and inform selection of sensitizing concepts (see Glen Bowen, https://sites.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_3/HTML/bowen.html) would be cited in the 'beginning' text. Any other literature used to help explore interpretations and justifications, i.e. 'reflected on' during thematic analyses of 'primary data' (forming the 'middle') are referenced there.
Depending on topic, question, and overall strategy, documents, academic studies and other texts could also feature as primary data. But I would say this is more likely for social worlds, discourse or narrative analysis ( see Adele Clarke - situational analysis).
regards and luck,
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals