Do you need a research question in Grounded Theory?

Unlike other research methodologies, grounded theory researchers do not need a research question before commencing their project. Instead, grounded theory researchers start with an interest in learning about a topic area and refine their interest and focus of that topic as their data collection and analysis progresses. So goes the theory…

In reality, all researchers work within disciplinary and institutional contexts and are bound by the expectations of research panels, ethics committees and funding bodies; these expectations can include the need for a pre-defined research question before approval is granted. In these instances, a broad open-ended question related to the topic area may suffice, initiating data gathering by inviting the participant to respond to a general topic.

The open-ended research question is kept intentionally broad with no indication given about the potential direction or pre-defined focus for the study, instead an openness is offered to the research participants to explore, discuss and define the qualities and boundaries of the topic in their own terms. For the grounded theorist, having started with a broad research question, they need to be ready to alter their research question as more refined questions of greater significance are discovered.

While a pre-defined research question isn’t a requirement of grounded theory, articulating a broad open-ended research question can be helpful in facilitating the administrative aspects of grounded theory research. An open-ended research question can be used to navigate disciplinary and institutional contexts and initiate data gathering without unduly influencing the nature or direction of that data collection and subsequent theory development.

If you found The Grounded Theorist useful, please consider making a one-off or monthly donation. Thank you.

References

Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2019). The SAGE handbook of current developments in grounded theory. SAGE Publications Ltd.          

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.  

Simmons, O. (2009). Ethical review proposals. Retrieved 1 May 2024 from https://www.groundedtheoryonline.com/getting-started/ethical-review-irb/

Theoretical Saturation in Grounded Theory

Theoretical saturation can be described as the point at which, through a process of concurrent data collection and analysis, no new concepts or categories are introduced. Once a category is theoretically saturated it is not necessary to continue to theoretically sample for comparison data, further data no longer sparking new insights or revealing new properties or dimensions of established categories and codes. The grounded theory can be considered theoretically saturated.

Theoretical saturation is a key factor in building a comprehensive, convincing and integrated theory, one in which an explanatory pattern in and of the data is present. The theoretical categories in a saturated theory are conceptually well developed, and categories and codes are well articulated and integrated. The conceptual density achieved through theoretical saturation is characterised by the depth, richness and interconnectedness of the grounded theory.

While theoretical saturation is characterised by no new data driven insights, properties or dimensions occurring, an alternative view exists. Theoretical sufficiency emphasises the adequacy and comprehensiveness of a theory developed from the data rather than a theory saturated to the maximum possible extent.

Achieving theoretical saturation is the criterion by which theoretical sampling can end and attention can shift to focusing on enabling conceptual integration of categories.

If you found The Grounded Theorist useful, please consider making a one-off or monthly donation. Thank you.

References

Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2023). Grounded theory: a practical guide (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.         

Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: guidelines for qualitative inquiry. Academic Press.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.

Holton, J. A. (2007). The coding process and its challenges. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 265-290). SAGE Publications Ltd.                         

Morse, J. M. (1995). The significance of saturation [Editorial]. Qualitative Health Research, 5(2), 147-149.      

Morse, J. M. (2007). Sampling in grounded theory. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory. SAGE Publications Ltd.           

Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. SAGE.   

Wiener, C. (2007). Making teams work in conducting grounded theory. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 293-310). SAGE.     

Constant Comparative Analysis in Grounded Theory

Constant comparative analysis is an iterative analytical process connecting all aspects of a research project. Primarily associated with grounded theory, constant comparative analysis is part of the concurrent data collection and analysis method, and commences with the first instance of data gathering. Data are initially compared within a single data set before comparing new data with existing data. Codes are compared with codes, and gradually grouped into categories of similar and related codes.

Constant comparative analysis is superficially similar to the iterative nature of thematic analysis, a method that tends to be more structured in its approach to coding and theme development, focusing on identifying and interpreting patterns and meanings in the data. However, the emphasis on continuous comparison and refinement of categories and concepts facilitated by constant comparative analysis, undertaken with the intention of developing a fully integrated theory or model, results in a higher level of abstraction than other forms of data analysis.

Constant comparative analysis aims to facilitate the development and refinement of concepts and categories grounded in the data. Using a combination of inductive and abductive analysis the researcher engages in ongoing acts of decision-making, and is encouraged to challenge and refine their theory. It is the combined use of inductive and abductive processes which are believe to account for the conceptual leaps achieved through constant comparative analysis. While seeking to ensure the complexity of the data are represented, successively more abstract conceptualisations of the data are created. In constant comparative analysis, patterns are recognised and extrapolated from the detailed description of individual cases to a generalised and abstracted conceptualisation of a phenomenon.

If you found The Grounded Theorist useful, please consider making a one-off or monthly donation. Thank you.

References

Birks M and Mills J. (2023) Grounded theory: a practical guide, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Braun V and Clarke V. (2013) Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners, London: Sage.

Bryant A and Charmaz K. (2007) The SAGE handbook of grounded theory, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Charmaz K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory, London: Sage.

Glaser BG and Strauss AL. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research, New York: Aldine.

Concurrent Data Collection and Analysis in Grounded Theory

A fundamental feature of grounded theory is the concurrent nature of data collection and analysis. Sometimes referred to as simultaneous data collection and analysis, it distinguishes grounded theory from other forms of research where data analysis only begins once data collection is significantly progressed or concluded. Underpinning concurrent data collection and analysis is the aim of achieving a rich analysis of the data, leading to a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the processes at play within the grounded theory.

In grounded theory, concurrent data collection and analysis enables the researcher to remain sensitive to potentially relevant sources and populations, to explore connections between different data sources, and to uncover new insights to inform the future direction of data collection. In practical terms, concurrent data collection and analysis often begins with a small purposive sample. These data are coded and then analysed within and across data sets. Once the initial cycle of analysis has concluded, the nature and source of the subsequent data – which may now have changed from that considered during the initial data selection – are sought, and the cycle repeated.

Concurrent data collection and analysis can prove challenging when faced with the realities of fieldwork. Opportunities to access participants or data resources may arise closely together or, conversely, recruitment and participation rates may be slow and protracted. The advice is to maintain and work within the concurrent data collection and analysis cycle as closely as possible. However, it is acknowledged that full coding and analysis are not always possible between instances of data collection. In these cases, initial impressions, insights and reflections should be captured in research logs and memos as an intermediate means of informing subsequent data collection.

In summary, concurrent data collection and analysis aims to extend and saturate understanding through theoretical sampling, keeping the study informed by, and grounded in, the data.

References

Birks, M., Hoare, K., & Mills, J. (2019). Grounded theory: the FAQs. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1-7.      

Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2023). Grounded theory: a practical guide (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). The SAGE handbook of grounded theory. SAGE Publications Ltd.          

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.  

If you found The Grounded Theorist useful, and would like to ensure its continued availability, please consider making a one-off donation or becoming a sustaining member. Thank you.

Memoing in Grounded Theory

Memos are a means of stimulating, exploring or extending thinking about a project and its data, providing a private and informal space to record and examine beliefs, assumptions and ideas as they occur. Typically recorded in written form, memos aid a researcher using grounded theory in capturing insights in their early stages of development, meaning they are subject to revision as the project or theory develops. However, it’s important to never discard or revise a memo because its subsequent significance may not be obvious at the time it’s recorded. Instead, memos can be recorded sequentially as additions to initial reflections.

Engaging in memoing from the planning stage or start of a project can help develop a memo-writing habit. The advice is to stop and memo at the moment an insight occurs, though these insights often occur at inopportune moments, for example, mid-interview or while travelling. At such times, embracing audio memos or writing memo jots can help the researcher to capture their transitory thoughts and insights; revisiting, transcribing or expanding upon them at a later date.

Regularly writing memos can create and maintain a sense of momentum and progression, and intentionally sitting down to engage in memoing practice can be particularly helpful in the early phase of a project. The content, length and analytical strength of memos will evolve throughout a grounded theory project, and plays a pivotal role in constant comparative analysis. Memoing can stimulate thinking about a particular code or category, capturing insights, and facilitate analytical activity to increase the level of theoretical abstraction. Memoing can also provide an audit trail of decision making and theory development.

The topics of memos may include some or all of the following, often in a single memo: decision making and research activities; extracting or recording potential meaning from data; exploring potential relationships between categories; considering the utility of a hypotheses. Whatever seems important at the time is worth recording in a memo.

Embrace the flexibility and freedom of memoing and experiment with different ways of memoing, be they hand written, typed or audio recorded.

References

Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2023). Grounded theory: a practical guide (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.  

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

Charmaz, K., & Thornberg, R. (2020). The pursuit of quality in grounded theory. Qualitative Research in Psychology. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780357            

Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: issues and discussions. Sociology Press.       

If you found The Grounded Theorist useful, and would like to ensure its continued availability, please consider making a one-off donation or becoming a sustaining member. Thank you.