Friday, March 14, 2008

Reading up on grounded theory

Well so far i have read a couple of articles and i think im gaining a better understanding of how i will use it to collect data and analyse it, and also to design my study so that it is congruent with grounded theory.
I understand these things..

♣ Grounded theory is a type of methodology - interpretive paradigm of qualitative research

♣ Interpretive paradigm -

♣ That it is a well organised and systematic approach - good for a novice research as it gives direction; good for small projects as it useful for time bound projects

♣ Analysis of data uses 'constant comparative analysis'

♣ Symbolic interactionism - discover the realities of the research participants, the nature of the objects in their worlds, and how they define and expereince their world. I can sort of see how this is relevant to what i plan to research as i will be aiming to explore the research participants expereince in their acute setting, and the realities of the real world in the acute setting.

♣ Grounded theory is particularly useful in areas where little is known about the phenomenon of interest. Used to generate theory that is grounded in data collection - grounded in the reality of the practice setting.

♣ The focus is on everyday life situations - e.g .this relates to how i am looking at the expereienced therapists having day to day contact with the new graduate therapist

♣ The basic assumptions of grounded theory - analyisis is basically pragmatic - allowing much latitude for ingenutiy and creativity. - there is a lack of "specific rules and procedures" for conducting research. - generating new concepts and theories. - goal of conceptualisation - ability to analyse information well as descriptions are not enough. - rigorous checking and refining of analysis during data collection. - data is analysed and organised after each collection. - data anlaysis and collection are "concurrent" - looking for similarities and differences in the data and considering where to go next to ask questions to clarify emerging theoretical concepts. - open minded reserach but not blank minded research - have to know the topic. -putting aside preconcieved ideas - trying to understand the point of view of participants.- sampling evolves during the process - participants cannot be predicted entriely at the beginning as the reseracher must decide where to move next after data collection and analysis.
Keywords from assumptions
-openmindeness
-no preconceived ideas
-constant comparative analysis - to redefine emerging concepts and categories
-rigourous checking and refining after each data collection
-no specific rules or procedures
-conceptualisation
-concurrent

♣ Best to use Strauss & Corbins Model - as the framework is clear and explicit that is often reassurring for novice researchers. Also it is useful for small studies with tight timeframes. Barrier to using is that an extensive study of the theoretical issues may not be possible.

♣Purpose of study - discovers patterns of behaviour in a particular groupd of people in a certain context - hense interactive paradigm. "discovery" "understanding" and "exploratory". Small study - describe and explain some underlysing social processes shaping interaction and behaviour.
The size of the project determines whether the researcher uses the metholodgy to generate theory or draws on the method as a strategy for qualitative anlaysis. I think i will be drawing on the method as a strategy for qualitative analysis???

♣Research questions are broad, general, flexible and open
e.g. tell me about... how do you manage that...what is the main concern... how do you continuously resolve that???

♣ Skills needed by the grounded theory researcher
-thinking skills
-communication skills
-organisation skills
-creative ability


I dont really understand these things - maybe it would be good to discuss these points?? But i will look for information on these points next
♠ Used to develop "mid range theories" - limited aspects and concepts of the real world - and its realtionship to "symbolic interationism.

♠ Grounded theory is inductive rather than deductive in approach
-Inductive - the theories arrive from data
-Decuctive testing a hypothesis derived from a theory
***Does this relate to the point above and pasted again below??
(Grounded theory is particularly useful in areas where little is known about the phenomenon of interest. Used to generate theory that is grounded in data collection - grounded in the reality of the practice setting)

♠ How to apply the knowledge of this theory to the design of my study!

3 comments:

*Jess* said...

Well im glad to report that my "unsure" comments on grounded theory have been answered.
Back then i was unsure of how grounded theory was going to influence my study design - BUT NOW I KNOW!!!
-how the question is shaped by grounded theory - how it gradually evolves to being more specific.
-how data collection and analysis goes hand in hand!!! etc

Observation and Research Page said...

I quite disagree when you mentioned that the Strauss and Corbin model is the best to use for novice researcher because Glaser's method is simpler and always straight to the point.

Glaser's method and Strauss + Corbin + Chamaz + etc may look the same but they are not similar. You will know what I mean if you read Glaser's book "The Basics of Grounded Theory".

Validity and evidence are main concerns of Strauss + Corbin + Chamaz + etc but the forcing of data is just inevitable when you use their model.

~Jess~ said...

I see what you mean - however at this stage of my research i was just reading up and finding out about the what grounded theory had to offer - it was interesting that i found a qoute that said that their method was "good for novice researchers" - however Strauss himself states this..

I guess for a small scale research that had to be completed within the year - it was difficult determining when the data was saturated. So this was defintly a limitation of my research however i found that common categories and subcategories kept arrising and all things seemed to fit in the end into a nice theory that followed through the framework.

My supervisor had experience using glasers approach - but i do need to read the book you suggested.

I found doing big diagrams of the process very helpful and the websites i found were also very helpful to make sense of the constant comparison method, core category, and the different strategies/outcomes/influences on the phenomenon.

Thanks for your thoughts - i plan to view your blog at a later date