Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Data-Oriented Methods: Grounded Theory (GT) (Systematic generation of…
Data-Oriented Methods: Grounded Theory (GT)
Most widely used qualitative interpretative framework in social sciences :
Inspired by
symbolic interactionism (SI)
, but also on
statistical positivism (SP)
SI
:
Pragmatism: Should be useful for society, "anti-theoretical"
Idiographic
rather than
nomothetic
Qualitative
rather than
quantitative
Exploration
: Revision during research
Sensitizing
: Open for new perspectives and ideas
Social action
: Micro-process.
Symbols
,
interactive
,
intersubjective
Cognitive symbols
: The
self* is in constant change, a social engine on its own. Ideas are part of self.
Closeness to empirical material and successive induction
SP: A 'dataistic' conception
Glaser and Strauss
Research should be usable and understood even by actors.
Alvesson&Sköldberg
:
Limits high level theory building
Not all research is immediately usable, but maybe later
Is knowledge not valuable on its own? I.e. knowing more about the creation of the universe
Systematic generation of theory on systematically obtained data. Exploratory, used both on qualitative and quantitative data
(Walsh et. al., 2015)
Verification
not as important as generation of theory
application
and
testing
of theory instead of Verification, to see when theory is valid, and modify theory when necessary
From data to theory, through
coding
data into
categories
. Categories similar to
concepts
Coding
is a must in GT. And a thorough piece of work.
Ineffective
? Glaser and Strauss argue less creativity and inspiration is needed, as results emerge on their own from the tedious work
Risk of losing sight of relations as incidents are put into categories and compared within those categories
Anyone could participate in generation of theory as long as based on data. Not only leaning on big masters' ideas
theory derived from data, ergo inductive method
Reading too much or too little on a topic can be problematic for own research, p. 75
Risk: Creating the same theory over and over
Data:
Offer no clear definition of what data is. Use words such as
event
,
incident
,
social interaction
, but inconsistent in practice
Introduces library research as source of data
Theory is made from taking memos during research process, exploring a *core category, and/or creating diagrams
On two levels: Substantive and formal (two stages of generality).
Alvesson&Sköldberg
: Artificial!, e.g. study on care unit vs social services in general
Conclusion:
Focus on local conditions, not "grand theory"
Uncritical attitude towards intertextual influence from other theories
Belief in objective data
Emphasis on symbolic meaning in social interactions
Focus on actors perspective
Risk of just stating the obvious in reducing research to common sense knowledge