Search results

This comment provides a discovery-oriented reading of grounded theory which supplements the verification-oriented approach to level specification. I address how grounded theory can be used to discover new constructs, to surface properties of constructs, to validate constructs, and to enhance understanding of levels of analysis of constructs. Two approaches to the integration of qualitative and quantitative data in grounded theory are discussed: the linking approach and computer-aided interpretive textual analysis. The comment shows how multi-level constructs can be developed from real life interaction using discovery oriented grounded theory.

Couched within the author’s memories and correspondence with Kathy Charmaz, this chapter considers the philosophical nature of Constructivist, or Charmazian Grounded Theory, and contrasts it with the philosophical underpinnings of Critical Grounded Theory. Using an autopoietic framework, this chapter sees Charmazian and Critical Grounded Theory as interconnected, complementary, but distinct in the way they each approach research participants and interpret social processes. The chapter ends with reflections on Kathy Charmaz's contribution to critical grounded theory and where she had hoped the next generation of grounded theorists might expand the methodology.

The paper will concentrate on the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) from the point of view of the contemplative social sciences (CSS). It will analyze how the mind is engaged in the construction of concept and what the role is of the consciousness of the mind's work in creating a theory that is based on the analysis of empirical data. We will review the research and analytical methods that could be inspirations for Contemplative Grounded Theory (CGT): constructivist grounded theory, classic grounded theory, transformational grounded theory, sociological introspection, holistic ethnography, mindful inquiry and transformational phenomenology, and contemplative qualitative inquiry.

We can find in many classical books from grounded theory (GT) some seeds of contemplative thinking, and we can reconstruct them (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Glaser, 1978; Strauss, 1987). We would like to develop the inspirations more and perhaps change the sense of GT after the contemplative turn. We would like to show the possibilities of using CGT in research and also its limitations. Some empirical examples from research and analysis will be given to show how contemplation could be used in GT.

Grounded theory (GT) is an inductive paradigm-based research method that focuses more on data depth and quality than the generalizability of results to a broader population and is substantially different from conventional hypothetico-deductive research approaches. GT has become a popular research approach in several social science fields including tourism and hospitality. By reviewing the development of GT and its associated philosophical underpinning, this chapter compares three widely used GT approaches advocated by Glaser (Classical GT), Strauss and Corbin (Straussian GT), and Charmaz (Constructivist GT). Given the various interpretations and approaches to GT, this chapter therefore offers an overview of the key distinguishing characteristics of these approaches to GT so as to facilitate more thoughtful approach selection in keeping with philosophical positions, research questions, and research objectives. This chapter then proposes a step-by-step guideline of the application of this method through an illustrative example in tourism. The chapter concludes with a critical reflection on this widely used qualitative research method and considers possible future developments.

The purpose of this paper is to compare fundamental concepts from the grounded theory approach to social science research and concepts from entity‐relationship diagramming, a technique used to model data from the field of systems analysis, and propose that entity‐relationship diagramming can be a useful tool for grounded theory researchers.

The paper compares and contrasts concepts from the two different fields, demonstrating the construction of an entity‐relationship diagram from data from an existing grounded theory research project, and the correspondence between the data model constructs and the grounded theory constructs.

A strong correspondence was found between these two sets of concepts and suggests that the entity‐relationship diagramming technique may be a useful addition to the social scientist's toolkit when carrying out research using the grounded theory approach.

The paper bridges two distinct fields – information systems and grounded theory – and proposes a novel way for qualitative researchers to analyse and depict data.

In this chapter honouring Professor Kathy Charmaz, her scholarship and her mentorship, I explore the impact of her work on my thinking and research. Specifically, I focus on the translation of her constructivist principles into my, and others', grounded theory methodological practice. Following the introduction, the chapter commences with a reflection upon coming across constructivist grounded theory (CGT) for the first time almost 20 years ago, and my excitement at finding a methodology that so well aligned with my social justice-oriented research. Already ‘seduced’ by (classical) grounded theory, I had been uncomfortable and wrestling with its problematic philosophical underpinnings, and Kathy's work provided an intriguing solution. This section also briefly reviews CGT's main features, including Kathy's central emphasis on critical reflexivity, interpretation and context, the researcher–participant relationship and the co-construction of knowledge with participants, whilst maintaining a focus on conceptual development. In Section Three, I examine the ‘translation’ of Kathy's constructivist principles into my and others' reflexive grounded theory methodological practice, focusing particularly on issues of researcher positionality/ies and participant involvement. I also consider the ways in which I am further extending these ideas in my ongoing CGT research, including in relation to researcher self-disclosure. In the concluding section, I observe that Kathy's scholarship not only put grounded theory on a new epistemological basis but also established constructivist GT's axiological foundation. I end with a reflection upon the legacy of her ‘curiosity and wonder’ as a scholar of the social world, her legendary mentorship and her generosity of spirit.

Restates the case for accounting and management research from a grounded theory perspective, and advocates its informed and more frequent application. Examines the intellectual foundations and key tenets of grounded theory in the context of researchers’ theoretical assumptions and methodological characteristics, discussed in relation to Laughlin’s (1995) classification schema. Pays particular attention to grounded theory assumptions and methods in relation to other interpretive paradigms such as symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology and hermeneutics. Describes the basic principles and methods of grounded theory research, and presents potential applications to the accounting and management research arenas. Argues that rigorous grounded theory research can offer the accounting and management literatures unique understandings that provide additional perspectives to those already being offered by major schools of thought, and discusses implications of grounded theory for informing contemporary professional practice.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze previous grounded theory articles and, based on this analysis, to provide a framework to assist reviewers in evaluating grounded theory research and increasing the rigor and credibility of this methodology in logistics and supply chain journals.

An analysis of existing articles appearing in the leading logistics and supply chain journals combined with an extensive review of the grounded theory method literature were used to develop a comprehensive framework for evaluating grounded theory research.

The paper finds that no standard criteria for publication of grounded theory research exists in logistics and supply chain journals. Grounded theory is routinely confused with other qualitative methodologies. Overall, this situation leads to publications that do not adequately address or report on the process for developing a grounded theory.

Reviewers can use this paper to establish the quality of grounded theory research. Reviewers who are unfamiliar with or skeptical of the grounded theory method can use the framework to evaluate the rigor and credibility of a grounded theory study rather than rejecting such research. The checklist can be used to provide thorough and constructive reviews to authors.

The paper presents a framework that provides a ready reference for reviewers to assess whether the authors have taken appropriate action in selecting a grounded theory methodology, collecting and analyzing data, developing a theory grounded in the data, and for evaluating their research. Existing research is compared with the framework to identify potential shortcomings in the review process. The application of the framework to the review of future articles provides an opportunity to increase the credibility and rigor of grounded theory research in logistics and supply chain management journals.

Information literacy has been consistently undertheorised. The purpose of this paper is to contribute in the ongoing theorisation of information literacy by exploring the meaning and implications of the emergent grounded theory of mitigating risk for information literacy research and practice.

The grounded theory was produced through a qualitative study that was framed by practice theory and the theoretical constructs of cognitive authority and affordance, and employed constructivist grounded theory, semi-structured interviews and photo-elicitation methods to explore the information literacy practices of language-learners overseas.

This paper provides a theoretically rich exploration of language-learner information literacy practices while further identifying the importance of time, affect and information creation within information literacy research and practice as well as the need for the continued theorisation of information literacy concepts.

The paper’s constructivist grounded theorisation of information literacy remains localised and contextualised rather than generalisable.

The paper raises questions and points of reflection that may be used to inform the continued development of information literacy instruction and teaching practices.

This paper contributes to an increasingly sophisticated theoretical conceptualisation of information literacy as well as forming a basis for ongoing theoretical development in the field.

A growing body of education research considers practices; however, there is less focus on a methodology that enables practical analysis of practices. Use of practice theory is growing, particularly in work and organisational studies, but practice-focused studies more frequently address theoretical than methodological agenda. This chapter proposes a practice-focused, constructivist grounded theory methodology as one approach which can address this gap. After first considering the ways in which, separately and in combination, practice-theory and constructivist grounded theory can support higher education leadership and management research, the chapter considers implementation of this methodology by drawing on a study into the practice of authority in higher education leadership. It concludes by considering some implications for the ways in which practices can be understood and the affordances and limitations of this methodology.