Dissertation Using Grounded Theory

By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies.We use cookies to offer you a better experience, personalize content, tailor advertising, provide social media features, and better understand the use of our services.

Tags: Art Of Problem Solving ClassesCritical Thinking Mathematical ReasoningWorking Women EssaysGood Words To Use In History EssaysEssays On Man Search For MeaningDissertation ProviderTroilus And Criseyde EssayWar Photo Essay

The implications of doing a literature review in early stages of a grounded theory research are presented as related not only to the methodological approach, but also, and more importantly, to its epistemological framework.

[] In Section 2, after a brief introduction of the GTM and its three main approaches, the suggestion first made by the creators of the GTM about disregarding the literature on the researched area is presented.

Its original creators, GLASER and STRAUSS, developed two of these approaches separately.

On the one hand, Barney GLASER (1978, 1992) further elaborated the "traditional" or "classical" GTM, and on the other hand, Anselm STRAUSS (1987), along with Juliet CORBIN (1990) developed what MILLS, BONNER and FRANCIS (2006) called "evolved" GTM.

They developed this research approach while studying the interaction with terminally ill patients in a hospital setting (GLASER & STRAUSS, 1965).

In this study, they created a method of simultaneous data collection and analysis that enables the construction of a theory grounded in the collected data (BIRKS & MILLS, 2011; BRYANT & CHARMAZ, 2007; GLASER & STRAUSS, 1967).In other words, they created a method that aims to construct theory rather than to test pre-conceived notions.[] Since the inception of GLASER and STRAUSS' method, GTM has been further expanded through three main approaches (BIRKS & MILLS, 2011; MILLS, BONNER & FRANCIS, 2008).Your access to the NCBI website at gov has been temporarily blocked due to a possible misuse/abuse situation involving your site.This is not an indication of a security issue such as a virus or attack.Finally, Kathy CHARMAZ (2000) introduced the third approach, which she labeled as the "constructivist" GTM.Regardless of the fact that all three GTM approaches share the goal of developing a theory grounded in data rather than testing a hypothesis, they differ in other aspects.Their later disagreement about the potential influence of reviewing this literature is examined in the following Section 3.Section 4 explores the epistemological background of the traditional or classical, evolved, and constructivist GTMs.In this section, the first two are described as positivist/post-positivists and contrasted with the constructivist foundations of the latter.In Section 5, the researcher's commitment to favor the data over any previously acquired knowledge, rather than his/her disregard of the literature, is presented as the key element in ensuring the groundedness of constructivist grounded theory research.