Related Experiment Videos
Grounded theory: reflections on the emergence vs. forcing debate
Judy E Boychuk Duchscher1, Debra Morgan
1Nursing Education Program of Saskatchewan, Saskatchewan, Canada. duchscher@siast.sk.ca
Journal of Advanced Nursing
|November 19, 2004
Summary
This paper compares Glaser's and Strauss's grounded theory (GT) methods, highlighting their distinct philosophical underpinnings and research approaches. Understanding these differences is crucial for researchers to select the appropriate GT methodology for their studies.
Area of Science:
- Social Sciences
- Qualitative Research Methods
Background:
- Grounded Theory (GT) originated from the collaboration of Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss.
- Over time, Glaser and Strauss developed divergent approaches to GT methodology.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare Glaser's data-driven theory generation model with Strauss's interpretive, conceptually descriptive approach.
- To delineate the distinctions in their philosophical paradigms and research strategies.
Main Methods:
- Comparative analysis of Glaser's and Strauss's grounded theory (GT) methods.
- Discussion of data sampling, collection, coding (open, advanced), memoing, and theoretical sampling strategies.
- Emphasis on constant comparative analysis as a core GT strategy.
Main Results:
- Glaser's model emphasizes theory emerging directly from data, avoiding interpretivism.
- Strauss's approach supports a more interpretive stance with directive questioning.
- Constant comparative analysis is central to both approaches despite philosophical differences.
Conclusions:
- Glaser's and Strauss's grounded theory (GT) methods stem from different philosophical paradigms.
- Researchers must clarify their chosen philosophical stance and its impact on GT research.
- Awareness of these distinctions is vital for effective application and interpretation of GT findings.