It seems that the authors of some books present grounded theory (GT) as the only approach or method of developing a theory. By the name of the approach, it may confuse beginner researchers.
I think a lot depends on what you mean by a "theory." If you include any statement of relationships between key concepts, then most forms of qualitative data analysis generate theories. Alternatively, if you want theory to also specify why those concepts are what is needed and why they are related in the ways that they are, then theories at that level are rarely created from a single qualitative study.
I think a lot depends on what you mean by a "theory." If you include any statement of relationships between key concepts, then most forms of qualitative data analysis generate theories. Alternatively, if you want theory to also specify why those concepts are what is needed and why they are related in the ways that they are, then theories at that level are rarely created from a single qualitative study.
David L Morgan
I mean with the word "theory" as an established explanation of an observed phenomenon or behavior. I agree that all qualitative approaches can generate a theory. But the real question here is "what's the simplest approach among all of them that is less complex and is easier for beginners?
David L Morgan
|An explanation can be based on a plain opinion or perception. The other needs a set of data so that an explanation can be called a theory.
No simple answer here Manuel - but good questions posed in the responses. In my mind, the way that the original question is framed lends itself back to GT. You are referring to 'beginning' researchers here. Such researchers usually need clarity and specific process to guide them. If a neophyte researcher comes to me and states that they want to develop a qualitative theory - then I will steer them to GT every time. That is what it is specifically designed to do and the process is established - including a variety of approaches to go about it. I agree with David though - the first question to a neophyte researcher saying that they want to develop theory is 'what do you mean by theory and why do you want to develop one?'
Dean Whitehead good points, sir! I find GT very sophisticated. That's why I was asking that question. The back and forth processes of GT from data collection to data analysis or vice versa could may loose enthusiasm along the way.
Of course this would ensure robust results and in crafting interrelated propositions.
Thanks.
Jennifer Lee-Anderson
that happen when those individuals lacked guidance, awareness and right information about GT. Thanks.
As a beginner, I have tried to understand that the first time of using grounded theory, my target is to generate a set of constructs from my data. Established relationships between the constructs will lead to a substantive theory. I have appreciated that the substantive theory formulated through grounded theory is not the formal theory referred to in science. Several replications of the substantive theory can ultimately lead to the formulation of a formal theory. A good starting !
Joseph Kipkorir Cheruiyot thanks for sharing your first hand experience of using GT.
I am unable to answer, but I would be curious to know why you would be looking for a "simple method". If you really want to theorise, maybe a complex method would be better, no?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Names