To rationalize the selection of a research methodology, one must understand its philosophical origins and unique characteristics. This process can be challenging in the landscape of evolving qualitative methodologies. Grounded theory is a research methodology with a distinct history that has resulted in numerous approaches. Although the approaches have key similarities, they also have differing philosophical assumptions that influence the ways in which their methods are understood and implemented. The purpose of this discussion paper is to compare and contrast three (...) widely used grounded theory approaches with key distinguishing characteristics, enabling a more thoughtful selection of approach. This work contributes to the existing literature through contrasting classic Glaserian grounded theory, Straussian grounded theory, and constructivist grounded theory in a systematic manner with prominent distinguishing characteristics developed from a review of the literature. These characteristics included historical development, philosophical perspective, role of the researcher, data analysis procedures, perspective of the grounded theory, and strengths/critique. Based on this analysis, three considerations are proposed to direct the methodological choice for a study: purpose, philosophy, and pragmatics. Understanding the similarities and differences in the grounded theory approaches can facilitate methodological transparency and determine the best fit for one's study and worldview as a researcher. (shrink)

Approximately 40 years ago, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss and their joint research approach, the constant comparative method of grounded theory, were at the forefront of what can be called a qualitative revolution. The publication of their book, The discovery of grounded theory, was a breakthrough because of the systematic procedures for qualitative research that were presented. Prior to this publication, qualitative research methodology was traditionally most often taught orally. Through their book, Glaser and Strauss defended the method of qualitative (...) research and countered the prevailing opinion that quantitative research provided the one and only approach to scientific inquiry. They argued that qualitative research is a field of inquiry in its own right, not merely to be used for pre-studies to “real” statistically based studies. The grounded theory method fits in with life world research, because the emphasis is on individuals as unique living wholes and the researcher focuses on the world as it is experienced by the individual. The researcher does not formulate any hypothesis in advance and tries to approach the research area with as few preconceptions as possible. Preconceptions, taken-for-granted assumptions, and interpretations must be handled by reflexive strategies in line with what Dahlberg has labelled “bridling”. Grounded theory offers the researcher a set of guidelines for building conceptual frameworks that specify the relationships among categories. The guidelines should be used as flexible tools rather than being seen as rigid rules. Grounded theory is a broad method with distinct procedures that work in practice and that are suitable to pragmatic researchers. The “core category” in grounded theory is, as I see it, the constant comparative method. The grounded theory method has been modified by the era within which it exists and by new ideas encountered in the world of inquiry. Varying views of what reality is and how it can be known affect the modes of the grounded theory method. (shrink)