Qualitative Method: The Grounded Theory - Research Paper Example

 Qualitative Method: The Grounded Theory Introduction The Grounded that constitutes a systematic methodology in social sciences that involves the construction of theory through analysis of data. Birks and Mills (2011) argue that the grounded theory operates in reverse direction to social sciences in the positivist tradition. The grounded theory involves constant comparative analysis, where the researcher moves in and out the data collection and analysis processes. Research using grounded theory, therefore, involves multiple iterations because the researcher moves back and forth between data collection and data analysis. The researcher begins with asking a question or a series of questions meant to lead to the generation of a theory concerning some aspect of social life. The theoretical background of the grounded theory can be traced to the works of Lstrauss and Barney Glaser in 1960s. The defining features of the grounded theory include a suitable research question, acquisition of data, and writing memos. Methodologically, using the grounded theory requires the researcher to follow a series of steps including identifying the area of interest and collecting data, interpreting the collected data and collecting more data for analysis, theoretical sampling, and category and concept development. Theoretical Background of the Grounded Theory Grounded theory approaches began from two renowned sociologists, Anselm Lstrauss and Barney Glaser in 1960 (Bryant & Charmaz, 2010). Their research was about dying in hospitals, an aspect that was rarely researched. Strauss and Glaser observed the behavior of dying patients and their interactions with hospital staff and relatives knowing that they would die. They developed an analysis of dying and also developed systematic methodological strategies that are currently used to study other topics (Clarke, 2005). Their first book concentrated mainly on these two strategies. As a result of differential backgrounds between Strauss and Glaser their grounded theory implemented two competing and contrasting aspects in sociology. Glaser had studied in Columbia University where quantitative methods had begun having a powerful influence on him. On the other hand, Glaser had been through a positivist training and had adapted codifying qualitative methods. This resulted in empirical and dispassionate process. Glaser saw the need to develop explicitly formulated, well thought out and organized set of procedures for testing and coding the hypotheses generated. It was impossible not to note his passion for empirical based research because of his Columbia background. Strauss was from the University of Chicago which was widely known for qualitative research (Glaser, 2008). Strauss unlike Glaser was influenced by pragmatist writings and symbolic Interactionism. Researchers had a perception that grounded theory was an approach that did not have any theoretical guiding theory. Clarke (2005) argues that after Mertz and Anfara published their book on qualitative research and its theoretical frameworks, many researchers begun disputing the belief. They clearly stated that it would be difficult to observe and describe things the way they are without any influence from conceptual theories and schemes. Their argument was that researchers no matter how inductive or unstructured they were they came in the fieldwork with their own orienting ideas. Defining Features of the Grounded Theory Research question The research processes must have a suitable research question which must be related to the objectives of the project (Glaser, 1993). For example, a project about developing a multimedia application on a student model to understand the benefits of multimedia configuration and how the application can be used in learning. This is an example of a grounded theory, which is established from the representation of a certain phenomenon and the data obtained generates theories. Data Acquisition The data collection techniques in grounded theory are similar to the techniques used in other research methodologies. The data may be either quantitative, qualitative or both. Data collected in a research is usually analyzed through a coding method (Charmaz & Mitchell, 2001). Data is usually coded in different methods according to the project stage and purpose of the data. Grounded theory has three types of coding they include axial coding, selective coding and open coding. According to Charmaz (2014), open coding is the process of choosing and naming or identifying categories from the analyzed data. Axial coding is the second type of coding, which puts data together in different ways. Selective coding refers to the process of identifying and selecting the main category and systematically linking it with other categories. Writing Memos Memos can be described as written records about the thoughts of a researcher when conducting a grounded theory research. Clarke (2013) contends that memos vary according to theoretical content, subject, intensity, usefulness and coherence to the final analysis. A memo might be vitally important and it is advisable to safely store a memo after writing one. Most grounded theorists believe that writing a memo is an important activity even when planning a research project up to the completion stage (Corbin & Strauss, 2014). Writing copiously and consistently helps in building intellectual assets. The Methodological Procedures of Using the Grounded Theory 1. Identifying the area of interest and data collection Any research requires the researcher to identify where he/she wishes to discover further details about a particular aspect. The grounded theory is adapted in situations where the field of research has been given superficial attention. This theory utilizes many types of data sources unlike other theories when collecting data (Charmaz, 2014). They include observations, interviews, life histories, and focus groups. These data collection methods lead to collection of primary data, which in is in most cases reliable sources of information. 2. Interpretation of data and further data collection. The data collected should be analyzed all together to find all the possible interpretations. This involves the utilization of coding procedures known as the open coding. This form of coding breaks down data into distinctive units of meaning (Glaser & Strauss, 2008). Memos are also used in this stage with the aim of describing situations and the impression of the researcher. Memos are actually part of the defining features of the grounded theory. The grounded theory is iterative in nature; this is why the researcher interpret collected and goes back to collect more data for further analysis. 3. Theoretical Sampling Refers to a data collection process used to generate theories whereby the researcher collects, codes and analyses the data then pin points the area and data to be collected. This ensures the theory is developed as it emerges. Sampling is directed by emerging theories rather than being determined (Clarke, 2005). Another feature of the method is informant sampling. To strengthen the results, further incorporation of situations, places and individuals might be needed. The researcher is required to determine the most suitable sample for the study considering the total population that is required to be studied. 4. Category and Concept Development. Category and concept development constitutes the final stage of the ground theory procedure. Axial coding refers to the process of concept appreciation which is conducted through dynamic interrelationships (Delamont, Lofland & Lofland, n.d.). A concept’s theoretical significance is determined by reviewing its relationship with other concepts and the connection it has with the life experience of an individual. Once a concept is identified, its characteristics and attributes can be reviewed in greater depth according to their weaknesses and intensity (Charmaz, 2014). Finally, all the data is subdivided into categories known as the emergence theory by the researcher. The developed theory is constantly tested for truthfulness and validity for it to be applied to the human society. Grounded Theory Application: Examples of Studies Fenwick, C., Chaboyer, W., & St John, W. (2012). Decision-making processes for the self-management of persistent pain: A grounded theory study. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal For The Australian Nursing Profession, 42(1), 53-66. The fundamental aim of the authors of this article was to establish decision-making processes for the self-management of persistent pain. The authors used a grounded theory study since they believed that the current theories concerned with decision-making and self-management of extreme pain conditions had not adequately accounted for the difficulties faced by patients suffering from chronic pain. The authors selected the grounded theory study since the method facilitates theoretical underpinnings and a creation of explanatory theory through analysis of human responses, interaction and processes. The sampling method involved both purposeful and theoretical sampling where 13 participants from two Australian clinics were selected based on their age, ability to communicate English, presence of chronic pain, self-care abilities, and under the management of a clinical pain specialist. Data collection involved in-depth interviews carried out between 2006 and 2008. The authors used a conversational approach to interviews; the aim of this was to enable participants provide vivid descriptions about their decision-making processes. The technique of data recording involved audio taping and later verbatim transcription into Microsoft Word Document. Data collected was imported to QSR NVivo version 2.0 for data management. The researchers analyzed through constant comparative analysis and coding and conditional/consequential matrix. Analysed data revealed that diminished physical capacity, social isolation and altered psychological reactions constitute the primary extra-ordinary conditions under which persistent pain patients make self-management decisions. The authors used the findings from the study to recommend that collaborative and productive relationships between patients and caregivers are critical to successful health outcomes. Law, R. (2009). Bridging worlds: meeting the emotional needs of dying patients. Journal Of Advanced Nursing, 65(12), 2630-2641. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05126.x Law (2009) noted the alarming complains among the district nurses that they were spending too much time attending to emotional support of the dying patients. The author aimed at developing a grounded theory to explain proper approaches by district nurses for meeting the emotional needs of dying patients. Law (2009), therefore, used a classic grounded theory approach. The sampling strategy was purposive and theoretical. Under this sampling technique, Law (2009) selected nine district nurses, who in turn selected dying patients and family caregivers form their caseloads. The researcher also did a theoretical sampling of five authors’ published accounts of dying patients. The researcher also made nine observations in addition to nineteen interviews, one email correspondence and five authored books. Data collection involved unstructured observations, semi-structured interviews and an email correspondence. The data collection period was 28 months between 2002 and 2005. Data was audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using Nvivo software, version 2.0. The researcher also used substantive and theoretical coding procedures. Findings from the study revealed that district nurses were not good at emotional support; these nurses thought that other specialist nurses were expert in providing emotional support for dying patients. The author concluded that bridging the dying world and the outside world is not simply about district nurses using a set of counseling skills, but it is a positive attitude that involves helping terminally ill patients live until they naturally die. Zambrano, S. C., & Barton, C. A. (2011). On the Journey with the Dying: How General Practitioners Experience the Death of Their Patients. Death Studies, 35(9), 824-851. The primary objective of this article is to establish how general practioners experience the death of their patients. Zambrano and Barton (2011) adopted social constructionist grounded theory using a purposeful sampling technique. The sample population was selected on the basis of having a place of work within Adelaide and at least five years of medical practice. The researcher used interviews to collect data from eleven participants. The authors conducted one-on-one interviews between April and May 2009. The audio-taped interviews were transcribed verbatim and later analyzed using the analytical approach. The researcher used NVivo 8 for analysis facilitation. The researchers used focused coding technique to code all the 11 interviews to ensure proper integration and explanation of larger portions of data. The research findings revealed that there is a difference in the experience of death between GPs and medical doctors in acute care settings. The author recommended that medical students should be taught with the metaphor Journey with the Dying because it may help young GPs to make sense of death. Advantages and Disadvantages Associated with the Grounded Theory Advantages The grounded theory is preferred as a method of research because of its ecological validity, novelty and parsimony. Ecological validity implies that findings from studies applying the grounded theory are accurate representations of reality. The theory is described as novelty because grounded theories are usually new and have the potential for enabling researcher make innovative discoveries (Charmaz & Mitchell, 2001). In terms of parsimony, the grounded theory uses the simplest definitions in explaining complex phenomena to provide practical explanations. Grounded Theorists have organized their ideas within the theory that gives it an upper hand as a research methodology. Its procedures are well spelt out in regards to analyzing empirical data. This kind of organization relate to the exact subjects of the phenomenon in research cutting out on large and baseless levels of theories (Charmaz, 2005). Focusing on specific aspects inspires an orderly and thorough analysis of the data making the theory very efficient. Once the research data is organized and thorough, researchers are able to analyze it within a very short period of time. One of the most outstanding features of Grounded Theory is its ability to allow the usage of either a multiple or a single source of data (Bryant & Charmaz, 2010). These sources could be focus groups or interviews, which provides a lot of flexibility to a researcher. Flexibility of the researchers usually ensures that they get sufficient evidence to support their findings. Narration of experiences is among the key sources of data under this theory. Researches on repeated processes are best described using this method. Example of such a communication is like one between a teacher and a student. The grounded theory is excellent in providing explicit and sequential guidelines for conducting qualitative research. These guidelines enable researchers to do quality research and come up with valid explanations and theories (Delamont, Lofland & Lofland, n.d.). The grounded theory also streamlines and integrates data collection and analysis in addition to legitimizing qualitative research as a scientific inquiry. Disadvantages A coin has two sides and so does this Grounded Theory have disadvantages too. Most of the researches conducted with this theory have a tendency to produce theories of lower level. The first ideas are usually regarded as short term concepts hence become part of the theory by repeatedly appearing in the data. Grounded theory is detailed from its very nature. The focus and time given to these details and procedures may make it difficult for the main end results to be seen (Glaser & Strauss, 2008). The coding stages, which take a lot of time usually draw a lot of attention making the final result of a research to appear as the shadow of the research. The bigger picture is usually the purpose of most researches but when it is diminished by the research method itself, the research itself will lose meaning. The process of coding in Grounded Theory takes a long time. The first stage of coding is open coding. This stage is an explanatory process where data is critically analyzed with an intention to acquire knowledge about the area of research (Glaser & Strauss, 2008). Axial coding is the second stage where its purpose is to get a clear understanding of the categories brought up by open coding. The final stage is elective coding where it’s a way of arriving at the main category (Corbin & Strauss, 2014). These three intense and thorough steps of coding take a long time, leading to overwhelming of first time users at this level. Themes and categories developed during the coding stage, take some time making it difficult to step up to larger concepts. Larger concepts require more time hence the Grounded Theory does not seem to have the capacity to step up to them due to the long period of time it takes on smaller concepts (Sage handbook of qualitative research, n.d). Grounded theory has become fashionable in the way it operates. Majority of users of this theory do not understand how it operates but claim to use it. A good example such a user is one who develops a basic concepts but does not go ahead to develop it. The advantages of the Grounded Theory outweigh the disadvantages making it a reliable theory to rely on especially by the junior researchers. Conclusion The grounded theory is used as the best method of scientific inquiry using the qualitative strategy. When using the grounded theory, researchers ought to comprehend the three defining features of the theory, which are having a suitable research question, acquisition of data, and writing memos. Using the grounded theory also needs the researchers to strict follow the four methodological procedures for them to come up with theories characterized by ecological validity. Regardless of its criticisms, the advantages of the grounded still make the best method of scientific inquiry. References Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2011). Grounded theory: A practical guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Bryant, A. & Charmaz, K. (2010). The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Los Angeles: Sage. Charmaz, K. & Mitchell, R. (2001). Grounded theory in ethnography, in P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J Lofland and L. Lofland (eds.), Handbook of Ethnography. London: Sage, pp. 160-174. Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies, in N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Boston: Little, Brown, pp. 507-536. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. (2nd ed.). London: Sage. Clarke, A. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (2rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 530-536. Glaser, B. (1993). Examples of grounded theory: A reader. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2008). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Publishing. Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Boston: Little, Brown, pp. 507-536 Journal Articles Fenwick, C., Chaboyer, W., & St John, W. (2012). Decision-making processes for the self-management of persistent pain: A grounded theory study. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal For The Australian Nursing Profession, 42(1), 53-66. Law, R. (2009). Bridging worlds: meeting the emotional needs of dying patients. Journal Of Advanced Nursing, 65(12), 2630-2641. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05126.x Zambrano, S. C., & Barton, C. A. (2011). On the Journey with the Dying: How General Practitioners Experience the Death of Their Patients. Death Studies, 35(9), 824-851. Read More