Methodological issues in grounded theory.

By J. Cutcliffe. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2000

742 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Examination of the qualitative methodological literature shows that there appear to be conflicting opinions and unresolved issues regarding the nature and process of grounded theory. Researchers proposing to utilize this method would therefore be wise to consider these conflicting opinions. This paper therefore identifies and attempts to address four key issues, namely, sampling, creativity and reflexivity, the use of literature, and precision within grounded theory. The following recommendations are made. When utilizing a grounded method researchers need to consider their research question, clarify what level of theory is likely to be induced from their study, and then decide when they intend to access and introduce the second body of literature. They should acknowledge that in the early stages of data collection, some purposeful sampling appears to occur. In their search for conceptually dense theory, grounded theory researchers may wish to free themselves from the constraints that limit their use of creativity and tacit knowledge. Furthermore, the interests of researchers might be served by attention to issues of precision including, avoiding method slurring, ensuring theoretical coding occurs, and using predominantly one method of grounded theory while explaining and describing any deviation away from this chosen method. Such mindfulness and the resulting methodological rigour is likely to increase the overall quality of the inquiry and enhance the credibility of the findings.

Subfields: Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ec78bba7a2252a283cd5dd4595a1d493bb74b955

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Glaser or Strauss? Considerations for selecting a grounded theory study (2016, positive): “Epistemological stances are dependent upon the paradigmatic assumptions regarding the relationship between the observer and what is being observed (Cutcliffe, 2000; Strauss & Corbin, 1990).”
Rigour and grounded theory research. (2003, background): “As qualitative methods are not uniformly agreed upon, and as there is more than one version of how researchers can go about implementing procedures in grounded theory methodology (Peshkin 1988, 1993, Solitis 1989, Cutcliffe 2000, Whittemore et al. 2001), researchers need to maintain a discourse on”
A Personal Experience of Working with Classical Grounded Theory: From Beginner to Experienced Grounded Theorist (2007, background): “Many researchers have discussed how to follow these principles (see, e.g., Baker, Wuest, & Stern, 1992; Cutcliffe, 2000, 2005; Duchscher & Morgan, 2004; McCallin, 2003; Wilson & Hutchinson, 1996; Wimpenny & Gass, 2000); however, few examples are given that illustrate the actual research process…”
Developing a grounded theory approach: a comparison of Glaser and Strauss. (2004, background): “Cutcliffe (2000) suggested that decisions about the literature depend on two factors.”
Choose Your Method: A Comparison of Phenomenology, Discourse Analysis, and Grounded Theory (2007, background): “…of establishing an audit trail, whereby the analyst documents her thoughts and reactions as a way of keeping track of emerging impressions of what the data mean, how they relate to each other, and how engaging with the data shapes her understanding of the initial hypotheses (Cutcliffe, 2000).”
Qualitative methods overview (2011, neutral): “Their approach had its origins in symbolic interactionism which aims to study patterns and processes in human interactions and understand how a group of people define their reality via their social interactions such as gestures, words, clothing and so on (Cutcliffe 2000).”
Power Relations in Qualitative Research (2009, background): “The reengagement is implemented through follow-up interviews meant to check the authenticity of emerging insights identified by researchers and verification of participants’ intended meanings (Cutcliffe, 2000) or member checking, carried out individually or in a group, in which participants have the”
Student-centred inquiry as curriculum as a model for field-based teacher education (2013, positive): “Kim and Heather revised these methods as a result of concurrent data analysis and collection in order to gather data in relation to emergent theory to accurately reflect the participants’ experiences (Cutcliffe 2000).”