Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology

8/10/2019 Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology

1/20

Constructivist

Grounded

TheoryMethodology

PREPARED BY JOHN N. ABLETIS

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY

POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES-STA. MESA


2/20

What is Grounded Theory

Methodology? as Qualitative Data Analysis (QDA) Method (see

Charmaz 2006, 2012)

as Research Strategy (RS) for systematic, iterative,and exhaustive gathering and analysis of data until no newrelevant concepts and dimensions emerge. (see Denzin &Lincoln 2011)

Grounded Theory is an inductive methodology. Although manycall Grounded Theory a qualitative method, it is not. It is a

general method. It is the systematic generation oftheory from systematic research. It is a set of rigorousresearch procedures leading to the emergence of conceptual

categories. (Ground Theory Institute 2014)


3/20

What is Grounded Theory

Methodology?

Study of a concept(Glaser 2010)

Study of (a) process(es) (Charmaz 2006) Study of a basic process in context(Strauss & Corbin

1998; Corbin & Strauss 2008; cf Clarke 2007 for

situation)


4/20

Main Varieties

Objectivist/Classical GTM (see Glaser & Strauss 1967; seehttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspx)

Post-positivist GTM (see Strauss & Corbin 1990, 1998)

Constructivist GTM (see Charmaz 2000, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011,

2012; Bryant & Charmaz 2007; cf Corbin & Strauss 2008)

Situational Analysis/Postmodernist GTM (see Adele Clark 2003,2006, 2007; interpretivist Clarke 2014:50; seehttp://clarkessituationalanalysis.blogspot.com/)

[W]hether you judge a specific study to be constructivist orobjectivist depends on the extentto which its keycharacteristics conform to one tradition or the other.(Charmaz 2006:130)
http://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://clarkessituationalanalysis.blogspot.com/http://clarkessituationalanalysis.blogspot.com/http://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspx


5/20

What is common among

different versions of GTM? emergentresearch process

taking care not to force data by delayingintensive lit review

immediate analysis after collecting initial data through coding(open coding/line-by-line coding) and memo-writing

writing memosfor each concept (its characteristics/propertiesand dimensions), pattern, and relationship

constant comparative method between codes, categories

and concepts

theoretical sampling until saturation of concepts

build grounded theoryinstead of mere description


6/20

Towards constructing middle-range(Charmaz 2006) orsubstantive(Cobrin & Strauss 2008) theories. For formal theorybuilding, see works of Barney Glaser.

For quali or/and quanti data from single or mixed methods

(pragmatic; toolkit approach Snape & Spencer 2003; totake advantage of fortuitous events Strauss & Corbin1998:203)

Can be used in conjunction with other RS/QDA

Open to other theories

GTM and Symbolic Interaction as Theory-Method Package(Clarke 2007; cf Corbin & Strauss 2008; Charmaz 2005;Chamberlain-Salaun, Mills & Usher 2010)


7/20

Reminder in using and

mixing methodsMethodologies are designed to do certain things and, withusage over time, have attained a certain degree ofcredibility when used in a manner consistent with the

design. To mix up different methodologies, or use onlycertain procedures and not other, erodes at thatcredibility. (Corbin & Strauss 2008:303)

- GTM researchers need to explain their inquiry process

because the theory development depends on theparticipants involved, because qualitative methods are notuniformly agreed upon... [and because in] groundedtheory, there is more than one version of how researcherscan go about implementing procedures (Chiovitti & Piran,

2003, p. 428). (Mruck & Mey 2007:518)


8/20

Constructivist GTM-Ontology

Realism/Obdurate reality[T]hat the empirical world can "talk back" to our pictures of it orassertions about it--talk back in the sense of challenging andresisting, or not bending to, our images or conceptions of it. Thisresistance gives the empirical world an obdurate character that isthe mark of reality... that both calls for and justifies empirical

science. (Blumer1969:22-23)

This Pragmatist position does not at all lead to radical relativism(as currently in one version of postmodernism)... One is that truth isequivalent to for the time being this is what we knowbut

eventually it may be judged partly or even wholly wrong... I realizedthere is no one reality out there waiting to be discovered (Geertz,1973); however, I do believe there are external events... AsSchawndt (1998) states, One can reasonably hold that conceptsand ideas are invented (rather than discovered) yet maintain thatthese inventions correspond to something in the real world (p.

237). (Corbin & Strauss 2008:4,10)


9/20

Constructivist GTM-Ontology

The constructivist view assumes an obdurate, yet ever-changing world but recognizes diverse local worlds andmultiple realities, and addresses how peoples actions affecttheir local and larger world. (Charmaz 2006:132)

My use of constructivism assumes the existence of anobdurate, real world that may be interpreted in multipleways. I do not subscribe to the radical subjectivism assumedby some advocates of constructivism. Consistent with Marx, I

assume that people make their worlds but do not make themas they please. Rather, worlds are constructed underparticular historical and social conditions that shape ourviews, actions, and collective practices. (Charmaz2008:409)


10/20


11/20

Constructivist GTM-Epistemology

However, it is not the event itself that is the issue in our studies,because each person experiences and gives meaning to eventsin light of his or her own biography or experiences....I agree withthe constructivist viewpoint that concepts and theories areconstructed by researchers out of stories that are constructed byresearch participantswho are trying to explain and make sense

out of their experiences and/or lives. (Corbin & Strauss 2008:10)

My constructionist approach makes the following assumptions:(1) Reality is multiple, processual, and constructedbutconstructed under particular conditions; (2) the research process

emerges from interaction; (3) it takes into account theresearchers positionality, as well as that of the researcherparticipants; (4) the researcher and researched coconstruct thedatadata are aproduct of the research process, not simplyobserved objects of it. Researchers are part of the researchsituation, and their positions, privileges, perspectives, andinteractions affect it... (Charmaz 2008:402)


12/20

Use of Theory As sensitizing concepts

[T]hat the concepts of our discipline are fundamentally sensitizinginstruments. Hence, I call them "sensitizing concepts" and put them incontrast with definitive concepts... A definitive concept refers preciselyto what is common to a class of objects, by the aid of a clear definitionin terms of attributes or fixed bench marks. This definition, or the benchmarks, serve as a means of clearly identifying the individual instance ofthe class and the make-up of that instance that is covered by the

concept. A sensitizing concept lacks such specification of attributes orbench marks and consequently it does not enable the user to movedirectly to the instance and its relevant content. Instead, it gives theuser a general sense of reference and guidance in approachingempirical instances. Whereas definitive concepts provide prescriptionsof what to see, sensitizing concepts merely suggest directions alongwhich to look... (Blumer 1954:7)

Or metaphors... a way of looking at the world more thantestable propositions(Fine 1984:240)

theoretical agnosticism (Henwood & Pidgeon 2003:138quoted in Charmaz 2006:165)

There is a difference between an OPEN MIND and an empty head.(Dey 1999:251 quoted in Charmaz 2006; Bryant & Charmaz 2007)


13/20

Research problemand opening

research questions

Initial memos

refiningconceptualcategories

Advanced memosrefining

conceptualcategories

Furthertheoretical

sampling ifneeded

Sensitizing concepts and general disciplinary perspectives

Re-examinationof earlier data

Adopting certaincategories astheoretical concepts

Initial codingdata collection

Theoretical

Sampling seekspecific new data

Theoretical memo-writing and further

refining of concepts

Sorting memos

Integrating memosdiagramming

concepts

Data collection--Focused coding

Writing the firstdraft

Slightly modified text fromCharmaz 2006:11


14/20

Theoretical Sampling initial sampling provides a point of departure (Charmaz

2006:100) in search for conceptsand their propertiesand dimensions

starts immediately after analysis of first set of data; arising gaps indata and analysis will guide the researcher about where tosample next; follow theoretical leads.

Use TS (Charmaz 2006:104) To delineate properties of a category

To check hunches about categories

To saturate properties of a category

The clarify relationship between emerging categories

To identify variation in a process involves abduction(discovery of new relationship), deduction

(subordinating a case to a known rule), qualitative induction(associating a case with a known rule)(Reichertz 2007; cfCharmaz 2013, 2008, 2006)

Theoretical saturationof concepts (evidence based)


15/20

InternationalNationalCommunityOrganizational and Institutional

Sub-Organizational, Sub-InstitutionalGroup, Collective IndividualsInteractionAction Pertaining to a Phenomenon

Conditional/Consequential Matrix (Corbin & Strauss 2008:94)

The Matrix consists of a series of concentric and interconnected circles with arrows going bothtoward and away from the center. The arrows represent the intersection ofconditions/consequences and the resulting chain of events. Conditions move toward andsurround the inter/action, representing how the consequences of any inter/action move frominter/action to change or ad to conditions in often diverse and unanticipated ways.... TheMatrix is meant only to be a conceptual guide and not a definitive procedure. The Matrix can

be modified to fit each study and data. (Corbin & Strauss 2008:93)


16/20

Process in data is represented by sequences of action/interaction/emotions changing inresponse to sets of circumstances, events, or situations... not all process is developmental orprogressive. It can be chaotic. It can move upward for a while, then turn downward, or it may

proceed circularly. (Corbin & Strauss 2008:98)

Visual Representation of Process (Corbin & Strauss 2008:99)


17/20

Evaluating GT

Fit, grab, work, modifiability (Bryant 2014)

Rigor and Credibility (Corbin & Strauss 2008:300-301)

intimate familiarity, originality, resonance, carefulengagement of relevant literature (Charmaz2006:182-183)

How are you going to answer theSo what question?


18/20

References Blumer, Herbert.1954. What is Wrong with Social Theory.American Sociological

Review19(1):3-10. Retrieved September 18, 2008(http://www.jstor.org/stable/2088165)

Blummer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method.Berkeley: University of California Press

Bryant, Anthony. 2014. The Grounded Theory Method. Pp. 116-136 in TheOxford Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by P. Leavy. NY: OxfordUniversity Press

Bryant, Anthony & Charmaz, Kathy. Eds. 2007. The Sage Handbook of Grounded

Theory. London: Sage Publications Charmaz, Kathy. 2013. The Power and Potential of Grounded Theory [Video

webcast]. Paper presented at the 44th Annual Conference of the BritishSociological Association--Medical Sociology Group held at the University ofLeicester on September 5, 2012. Retrieved August 21, 2014(http://youtu.be/zY1h3387txo)

Charmaz, Kathy. 2012. The Power and Potential of Grounded Theory.Medical

Sociology online6(3). Retrieved October 7, 2014(http://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdf)

Charmaz, Kathy. 2011. Grounded Theory Methods in Social Justice Research.Pp. 359-380 in The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4thed., edited by N.K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Charmaz, Kathy. 2008. Constructionism and the Grounded Theory Method. Pp.

397-412 inHandbook of Constructionist Research, edited by J. A. Holstein & J. F.Gubrium. NY: The Guilford Press
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2088165http://www.jstor.org/stable/2088165http://www.jstor.org/stable/2088165http://youtu.be/zY1h3387txohttp://youtu.be/zY1h3387txohttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://www.medicalsociologyonline.org/resources/Vol6Iss3/MSo-600x_The-Power-and-Potential-Grounded-Theory_Charmaz.pdfhttp://youtu.be/zY1h3387txohttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2088165


19/20

Charmaz, Kathy. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical GuideThrough Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage Publications

Charmaz, Kathy. 2005. Grounded Theory in the 21st Century: Applications forAdvancing Social Justice Studies. Pp. 507-535 inThe Sage Handbook ofQualitative Research, 3rd., edited by N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Chamberlain-Salaun, Jennifer, Mills, Jane, & Usher, Kim.J., Mills, J. & Usher, Kim.

2013. Linking Symbolic Interactionism and Grounded Theory Methods in aResearch Design: From Corbin and Strauss' Assumptions to Action. SageOpen3(3):1-10. Retrieved September 3 2014(http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757)

Clarke, Adele E. & Keller, Reiner. 2014. Engaging Complexities: Working

Against Simplification as an Agenda for Qualitative Research Today: AdeleClarke in Conversation with Reiner Keller. Forum QualitativeSozialforchung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 15(2), Art. 1. RetrievedOctober 9, 2014 (http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667)

Clarke, Adele E. 2007. Grounded Theory: Critiques, Debates, and SituationalAnalysis. Pp. 423-442 in The Sage Handbook of Social Sciences Methodology,edited by W. Outhwaite & S. P. Turner. London: Sage Publications

Corbin, Juliet & Strauss, Anselm. 2008. Basics of Qualitative Research:Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 3rded.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Crotty, Michael. 1998. The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning andperspective in the research process. London: Sage Publications, pp. 1-17.Retrieved September 26, 2014(http://kakali.org/edld6384/8561/readings/crotty%20chapter%201.pdf)
http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://kakali.org/edld6384/8561/readings/crotty%20chapter%201.pdfhttp://kakali.org/edld6384/8561/readings/crotty%20chapter%201.pdfhttp://kakali.org/edld6384/8561/readings/crotty%20chapter%201.pdfhttp://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2186/3667http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/3/2158244013505757


20/20

Denzin, Norman K. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. Eds. 2011. The Sage Handbook ofQualitative Research. 4thed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Fine, Gary Alan.1984. Negotiated Orders and Organizational Cultures.Annual Review of Sociology10:239-262. Retrieved November 22, 2014(http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083175)

Glaser, Barney G. 2010. Grounded Theory is the study of a concept! [Videowebcast]. Retrieved December 11, 2014(http://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmp)

Glaser, Barney G. & Strauss, Anselm L. [1967] 2006. The Discovery ofGrounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick, NJ:Aldine Transaction

Grounded Theory Institute. 2014. What is Grounded Theory. RetrievedDecember 11, 2014 (http://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspx)

Mruck, Katja & Mey, Gunter. 2007. Grounded Theory and Reflexivity. Pp.515-538 in The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, edited by A. Bryant & K.Charmaz. London: Sage Publications

Reichertz, Jo. 2007. "Abduction: The Logic of Discovery of Grounded Theory."

Pp. 214-228 in The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, edited by A. Bryantand K. Charmaz. London: Sage

Snape, Dawn & Spencer, Liz. 2003. Foundations of Qualitative Research.Pp. 1-23 in Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social ScienceStudents and Researchers, edited by J. Ritchie & J. Lewis. London: SagePublications

Strauss, Anselm L. & Corbin, Juliet M. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research:

Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 2nded.Thousand Oaks CA: Sage
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083175http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083175http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083175http://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmphttp://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmphttp://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmphttp://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmphttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://www.groundedtheory.com/what-is-gt.aspxhttp://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmphttp://youtu.be/OcpxaLQDnLk?list=PLNCas4ucmlWPDDcKr6QJPOL_FI0jvzFmphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2083175

Documents

Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology