Looking at the international literature today, there is a lack of understanding between the different Grounded Theory (GT) approaches currently in circulation. Glaserian GT, Barbara Bowers followed by Leonard Schatzman dimensional analysis, Juliet Corbin Straussian GT, Adele Clarke situation analysis and Kathy Charmaz pragmatic constructivist GT. As a result of the divergence of Strauss and Glaser's methodological paths, pragmatic constructivist grounded theory (PCGT) and situation analysis are the more common approaches in use today.

I suggest you look at this book: Morse, Janice M., Bowers, B. J., Charmaz, K., Clarke, A. E., Corbin, J., Porr, C. J. ve Stern, P. N. (2021). Temellendirilmiş Teori Geliştirme: The Second Generation Revisited (2. bs). New York: Routledge.

Can you say more about why you are looking for a grounded theory as part of your quantitative research?

As you can see from Volkan Aşkun response, there is not a specific 'ground theory' but different types of grounded theory approach. The general approach is generally termed a 'bottom-up' or data-driven approach, where the researcher develop analytic concepts and themes from the qualitative data collected. This is through an iterative process of reading and re-reading the qualitative data sources.

In my last research, i had to analyse, interpret, and explain the socially constructed scenario. See below the justification I wrote. First, provide an answer to David L Morgan question, then you can justify your work. However, according to my understanding, GT is a strategy. - Hope and request David L Morgan will add/critique my answer

The said purpose can be achieved by following the Glaser and Strauss (1967) Grounded Theory (GT) methodology, as it discovers “Theory” from “data” collected from the social environment. Even Glaser and Strauss separated later and developed the theory in two directions that fundamentally remain unchanged. Glaser highlights that the core of the approach needs to be induction; hence he stopped the literature review until data coding, a middle milestone of the process. However, Strauss’s branch of GT, which is induction-focused but allows a systematic approach that emphasises validation, is more in line with the current research requirement (Deterding and Waters, 2021).

This approach is named “constructivist grounded theory”- CGT (Charmaz, 2006, 2016; Bryant, 2002). It incorporates researchers’ and participants’ interpretations to construct the concepts. There, the individual’s positions, roles, backgrounds, and values are recognised.

However, the present research refused the GT derives from positivism as the philosophical selection. Still, the CGT grows into an interpretive tradition with more pragmatism continua (Charmaz, 2006), where the present research lies. However, in addition to CGT, the other branches of GT such as Critical Grounded Theory (assists research with a realist perspective - one reality explains how people’s interprets are shaped/moderate it) and Situational

Analysis (creating situational maps of major elements, their context, and positionalities) also somewhat agree with my work. Therefore, my work selected the common continua of GT, where the core principles are included. Those core principles are (1) “Grounded” thinking – welcome unanticipated findings, (2) Multiple data capturing to explain the context, (3) Pursuing theory through data – a must close-reading of data, and (4) Theoretical sampling – as conceptual classifications are required. Further, my work has considered a few myths to exclude, such as (1) The research should produce full-pledged theory, (2) Should not gather literature knowledge/theory at the beginning – Glaser’s Argument, and (3) The time taken to coding is extensive (Timonen, Foley, and Conlon,2018). "

I am not sure which of the various approaches to GT you are following. It sounds closest to Constructivist Grounded Theory, and if so you should just use that to describe how and why you did what you did -- without discussing approaches that you didn't use.

In general, I would not recommend mixing and matching different versions of GT. If none of the major versions match what you are doing, then you should be explicit about why felt compelled to do something different.