GROUNDED THEORY

What Is Grounded Theory

Grounded theory is a relatively new approach to research originally defined as “the discovery of theory from data” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. XX). In their seminal work The Discovery of Grounded Theory, the originators of grounded theory, Barony Glaser and Anselm Strauss, described the research process as the discovery of theory through the rigors of social research. A more detailed definition forwarded by Strauss and Corbin (1990) is as follows:

“A grounded theory is one that is inductively derived from the study of the phenomenon it represents. That is, it is discovered, developed and provisionally verified through systematic data collection and analysis of data pertaining to that phenomenon. Therefore, data collection, analysis and theory stand in reciprocal relationship to one another.” (p. 23)

Grounded theory research is discovered empirically, through induction, not deduction. The focus of grounded theory research, on support from evidence, promises to develop theories that minimally fit the immediate situation being addressed. The responsiveness of grounded theory research is aimed at contextual values and not merely the values of the investigator. Grounded theory research involves the formulation of local understandings that without inquiry by the researcher remain implicit and unexplained (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

The Application of grounded theory

Given the differences in approaches to the method, most texts and articles on the subject advocate

reading the original 'Discovery' as a starting point. Whilst it may have dated somewhat since its

publication, the guiding principles and procedures are explained in detail and endure as the essential

guidelines for applying the method. It is also important to note that its original intent was a

methodology specifically for sociologist. In recent years, the diffusion across a number of disciplines

such as social work, health studies, psychology and more recently management, has meant the

adaptation of the method in ways that may not be completely congruent with all of the original

principles. However, despite conflicting perceptions over methodological transgressions and implementation, there remain a set of fundamental homothetic principles associated with the method.

Assumptions:

· The aim of grounded theory research is to generate or discover a theory;

· the researcher has to set aside theoretical ideas to allow a “substantive” theory to emerge;

· theory focuses on how individuals interact in relation to the phenomenon under study;

· theory asserts a plausible relation between concepts and sets of concepts;

· theory is derived from data acquired through fieldwork, interviews, observations, and documents;

· data analysis is systematic and begins as soon as data become available;

· data analysis proceeds through identifying categories and connecting them;

· further data collection (or sampling) is based on emerging concepts;

· these concepts are developed through constant comparison with additional data;

· data collection can stop when new conceptualizations emerge;

· data analysis proceeds from “open coding” (identifying categories, properties, and dimensions) through “axial coding” (examining conditions, strategies, and consequences) to selective coding around an emerging story line; and

· the resulting theory can be reported in a narrative framework or as a set of propositions.

Features of Grounded Theory

· simultaneous collection and analysis of data.

· creation of analytic codes and categories developed from data and not by pre-existing conceptualisations (theoretical sensitivity).

· discovery of basic social processes in the data.

· inductive construction of abstract categories.

· theoretical sampling to refine categories.

· writing analytical memos as the stage between coding and writing .

· the integration of categories into a theoretical framework.

Methods

The basic idea of the grounded theory approach is to read (and re-read) a textual database (such as a corpus of field notes) and "discover" or label variables (called categories, concepts and properties) and their interrelationships. The ability to perceive variables and relationships is termed "theoretical sensitivity" and is affected by a number of things including one's reading of the literature and one's use of techniques designed to enhance sensitivity.

Open Coding

Open coding is the part of the analysis concerned with identifying, naming, categorizing and describing phenomena found in the text. Essentially, each line, sentence, paragraph etc. is read in search of the answer to the repeated question "what is this about? What is being referenced here?" These labels refer to things like schools, information gathering, friendship, social loss, etc. They are the nouns and verbs of a conceptual world. Part of the analytic process is to identify the more general categories that these things are instances of, such as institutions, work activities, social relations, social outcomes, etc.

We also seek out the adjectives and adverbs --- the properties of these categories. For example, about a friendship we might ask about its duration, and its closeness, and its importance to each party. Whether these properties or dimensions come from the data itself, from respondents, or from the mind of the researcher depends on the goals of the research. It is important to have fairly abstract categories in addition to very concrete ones, as the abstract ones help to generate general theory. the most grounded theorists believe they are theorizing about how the world *is* rather than how respondents see it. The process of naming or labeling things, categories, and properties is known as coding. Coding can be done very formally and systematically or quite informally. In grounded theory, it is normally done quite informally. For example, if after coding much text, some new categories are invented, grounded theorists do not normally go back to the earlier text to code for that category. However, maintaining an inventory of codes with their descriptions (i.e., creating a codebook) is useful, along with pointers to text that contain them. In addition, as codes are developed, it is useful to write memos known as code notes that discuss the codes. These memos become fodder for later development into reports.

Axial Coding

Axial coding is the process of relating codes (categories and properties) to each other, via a combination of inductive and deductive thinking. To simplify this process, rather than look for any and all kind of relations, grounded theorists emphasize causal relationships, and fit things into a basic frame of generic relationships. The frame consists of the following elements:

Element	Description
Phenomenon	This is what in schema theory might be called the name of the schema or frame. It is the concept that holds the bits together. In grounded theory it is sometimes the outcome of interest, or it can be the subject.
Causal conditions	These are the events or variables that lead to the occurrence or development of the phenomenon. It is a set of causes and their properties.
Context	Hard to distinguish from the causal conditions. It is the specific locations (values) of background variables. A set of conditions influencing the action/strategy. Researchers often make a quaint distinction between active variables (causes) and background variables (context). It has more to do with what the researcher finds interesting (causes) and less interesting (context) than with distinctions out in nature.
Intervening conditions	Similar to context. If we like, we can identify context with moderating variables and intervening conditions with mediating variables. But it is not clear that grounded theorists cleanly distinguish between these two.
Action strategies	The purposeful, goal-oriented activities that agents perform in response to the phenomenon and intervening conditions.
Consequences	These are the consequences of the action strategies, intended and unintended.

Selective Coding

Selective coding is the process of choosing one category to be the core category, and relating all other categories to that category. The essential idea is to develop a single storyline around which all everything else is draped. There is a belief that such a core concept always exists.

I believe grounded theory draws from literary analysis, and one can see it here. The advice for building theory parallels advice for writing a story. Selective coding is about finding the driver that impels the story forward.

Memos

Memos are short documents that one writes to oneself as one proceeds through the analysis of a corpus of data. There are two kinds of memos-(1) field note and (2) the code note. Equally important is the theoretical note. A theoretical note is anything from a post-it that notes how something in the text or codes relates to the literature, to a 5-page paper developing the theoretical implications of something. The final theory and report is typically the integration of several theoretical memos. Writing theoretical memos allows you to think theoretically without the pressure of working on "the" paper.

The grounded theory process

1. The identification of an area of interest and data collection

Initially, as with any piece of research, the process starts with an interest in an area one wishes to explore further. Usually researchers adopt grounded theory when the topic of interest has been relatively ignored in the literature, or has been given only superficial attention. Consequently, the researcher's mission is to build his/her own theory from the ground. However, most researchers will have their own disciplinary background which will provide a perspective from which to investigate the problem. Nobody starts with a totally blank sheet. A sociologist will be influenced by a body of sociological thought, a psychologist will perceive the general phenomenon from either a cognitive, behavioural, or social perspective, and a business academic may bring to bear organisational, marketing, economic, or systems concepts which have structured their analysis of managerial behaviour. These theories provide sensitivity and focus which aid the interpretation of data collected during the research process. The difficulty in applying grounded theory comes when the area of interest has a long, credible and empirically based literature. Grounded theory may still be used, but literature in the immediate area should be avoided so as not to prejudice or influence the perceptions of the researcher.

Here the danger lies in entering the field with a prior disposition, whether conscious of it or not, of testing such existing work rather than developing uncoloured insights about the area of study. In order to avoid this, it is generally suggested that the researcher enter the field at a very early stage and collect data in whatever form appropriate. Unlike other qualitative methodologies which acknowledge only one source of data, for example the words of those under study as in the case of phenomenology, grounded theory research may be based on single or multiple sources of data. These might include interviews, observations, focus groups, life histories, and introspective accounts of experiences. With grounded theory, researchers should also avoid being too structured in their methods of collecting information. For example, an interview should not be conducted using a prescribed formal schedule of questions. This would defeat the objective which is to attain first hand information from the point of view of the informant. Nonetheless, this is easier in theory than in practice. Informants usually want some guidance about the nature of the research and what information is sought. Totally unstructured interviews therefore cause confusion, incoherence, and result in meaningless data. Structured interviews, on the other hand, may be merely an extension of the researcher's expectations. The art lies therefore in finding a balance which allows the informant to feel comfortable enough to expand on their experiences, without telling them what to say.

2. Interpreting the data and further data collection

As the data are collected they should be analysed simultaneously by looking for all possible interpretations. This involves utilising particular coding procedures which normally begins with open coding. Open coding is the process of breaking down the data into distinct units of meaning. As a rule, this starts with a full transcription of an interview, after which the text is analysed line by line in an attempt to identify key words or phrases which connect the informant's account to the experience under investigation. This process is associated with early concept development which consists of "identifying a chunk or unit of data (a passage of text of any length) as belonging to, representing, or being an example of some more general phenomenon". In addition to open coding, it is important to incorporate the use of memos. Memos are notes written immediately after data collection as a means of documenting the impressions of the researcher and describing the situation. These are vital as they provide a bank of ideas which can be revisited in order to map out the emerging theory. Essentially, memos are ideas which have been noted during the data collection

process which help to reorientate the researcher at a later date.

3. Theoretical sampling

A further feature of the method relates to the sampling of informants. Sampling is not determined to begin with, but is directed by the emerging theory. Initially, the researcher will go to the most obvious places and the most likely informants in search of information. However, as concepts are identified and the theory starts to develop, further individuals, situations and places may need to be incorporated in order to strengthen the findings. This is known as 'theoretical sampling' which is "the process of data collection for generating theory whereby the analyst jointly collects, codes and analyses the data and decides what data to collect next and where to find it, in order to develop the theory as it emerges. This process of data collection is 'controlled' by the emerging theory" (Glaser, 1978 p.36).

In addition to theoretical sampling, a fundamental feature of grounded theory is the application of the 'constant' comparative method. As the name implies, this involves comparing like with like, to look for emerging patterns and themes. "Comparison explores differences and similarities across incidents within the data currently collected and provides guidelines for collecting additional data...........Analysis explicitly compares each incident in the data with other incidents appearing to belong to the same category, exploring their similarities and differences". This process facilitates the identification of concepts. Concepts are a progression from merely describing what is happening in the data, which is a feature of open coding, to explaining the relationship between and across incidents. This requires a different, more sophisticated, coding technique which is commonly referred to as 'axial coding' and involves the process of abstraction onto a theoretical level.

4. Concept and category development

Axial coding is the appreciation of concepts in terms of their dynamic interrelationships. These should form the basis for the construction of the theory. "Abstract concepts encompass a number of more concrete instances found in the data. The theoretical significance of a concept springs from its relationship to other concepts or its connection to a broader gestalt of an individual's experience". In turn, once a concept has been identified, its attributes may be explored in greater depth, and its characteristics dimensionalised in terms of their intensity or weakness. Finally the data are subsumed into a core category which the researcher has to justify as the basis for the emergent theory. A core category pulls together all the strands in order to offer an explanation of the behaviour under study. It has theoretical significance and its development should be traceable back through the data. This is usually when the theory is written up and integrated with existing theories to show relevance and new perspective. Nonetheless, a theory is usually only considered valid if the researcher has reached the point of saturation. This involves staying in the field until no new evidence emerges from subsequent data. It is also based on the assumption that a full interrogation of the data has been conducted, and negative cases, where found, have been identified and accounted for.

WHAT GROUNDED THEORY IS NOT

misconceptions

· Grounded Theory Is Not an Excuse to Ignore the Literature: A common misassumption is that grounded theory requires a researcher to enter the field without any knowledge of prior research.

· Grounded Theory Is Not Presentation of Raw Data

· Grounded Theory Is Not Theory Testing, Content Analysis, or Word Counts

· Grounded Theory Is Not Simply Routine Application of Formulaic Technique to Data

· Grounded Theory Is Not Perfect

· Grounded Theory Is Not Easy

· Grounded Theory Is Not an Excuse for the Absence of a Methodology

Conclusion

We count ourselves among the scholar-practitioners who consider grounded theory as a “way of life.” As Glaser (1998) observed, “There are people who need a way of constantly looking at data and its realities in order to figure out what they are doing…To be sure grounded theory is non-religious, non-spiritual, non-ideological and non-requiring to join. It is free to use and see what emerges as one might wish. They do it every day”. The utility of grounded theory in an action context, or in purposeful therapy is clear, because grounded theory will have relevance and grab in multiple contexts and across a wide range of disciplines. It is powerful because it “grounds” itself in reality through systematically generated research.

Grounded learning developed out of the desire to put learning and conceptualization into the hands of every student. Surely, the rigor and discipline of field note taking, coding, and data analysis led to the emergence if creative ideas for student transformation. Solid grounded theory methodology can be most valuable for the educational practitioner as well. Sampling for what works in education, getting to the root of student needs and the discovery of learning gaps can all be possible future grounded learning action areas to consider.

References

Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: conceptualization contrasted with description. Mill Valley CA: Sociology Press

Glaser, B. (2002). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Mill Valley, CA.: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (2003). The grounded theory perspective II. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. (2004). Grounded theory interview. Retrieved April 2004, 2004, from

http://www.groundedtheory.com/vidseries1.html

Krippendorff, K. (2003). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Locke, K. (2001). Grounded theory in management research. London: Sage.

Sprenger, S. (2003). How to Go About Doing an Excellent "Explication de Texte". Retrieved 4/20/04, 2004, from

http://frenital.byu.edu:16080/classes/fr451/explicationtexte.html

Suber, P. (1997). Explication Assignment. Retrieved May 19, 2004, 2004, from

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/explicat.htm

Walker, G. H. (2002). Concept Mapping and Curriculum Design. Retrieved May 17, 2004, 2004, from http://www.studygs.net/mapping/mapping.htm