Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy

Kendall, J.

doi:10.1177/01939459922044162

Cited by 74 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For Glaser (1992), the attempts by Strauss and Corbin (1998) to formalize grounded theory procedures and methods (although undoubtedly useful for some beginning researchers) has led them down the path of verification and away from discovery, on the way displacing use of the method of constant comparison and forcing data into preconceptions (particularly of cause and consequence) rather than enabling researchers to hear what is relevant and meaningful in their data. Glaser described their approach as "full conceptual description" rather than grounded theory (for detailed comment, see Kendall, 1999). It is not our purpose to enter into this ongoing debate about what constitutes the "true" legacy of grounded theory.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounded theory in psychological research.

Henwood

Pidgeon

2003

Qualitative Research in Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodology and Design.

247

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generating theory that is grounded in semistructured interviews, fieldwork observations, case-study notes, or other forms of textual documentation is one important principle of much qualitative social science today. It is often specifically associated with the methodological approach adopted by the American sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss during their investigation of the institutional care of the terminally ill (1965), which they subsequently termed grounded theory (1967). Grounded theory studies are often prompted by quite general research interests at the outset. These might include identifying actors' views or perspectives on a topic or investigating processes or phenomena of interest within their local contexts and settings, and from there arriving at insights and explanatory schemes that are relevant to ("grounded in") realworld problems, a previously unresearched topic area, or both.Since the late-1980s psychologists have been interested in using the principles and practices of grounded theory (see Henwood & Pidgeon, 1992;Rennie, Phillips, & Quartaro, 1988). In this chapter we argue that its usefulness for psychologists is both as a node around which there are discussions of a wide range of contemporary methodological issues (e.g., epistemology, design, interpretive practice, and validity) and as a resource for framing studies and analytical strategies that deal in principled and practical ways with the exigencies of conducting systematic but creative qualitative research that has clear relevance to substantive problem domains. In so doing we also hope to avoid presenting grounded theory as a unitary method (for some it is the method of thematic qualitative inquiry), instead preferring to reflect contemporary developments in thinking about the place of the approach within qualitative inquiry in general.We wish to thank Marcus Sangster, Huw Davies, Paul Finch (of the Forestry Commission), Sarah Pearce, Ffion M. Roberts, Sue Hunter, and all of the individuals who contributed to both the North Wales Community Focus Groups and the Stakeholder Panel. Our colleague Barry Turner, who died unexpectedly in 1995, shared with us many of his insightful thoughts on the use of grounded theory method. Mildred Blaxter has been a valued commentator and discussant. The opinions expressed here are, however, solely ours.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounded theory in psychological research.

Henwood

Pidgeon

2003

Qualitative Research in Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodology and Design.

247

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Against this background, this article explores how axial coding and the S & C coding paradigm have influenced IS research, in the context of the controversy about forcing vs emergence (Kendall, 1999;Walker and Myrick, 2006;Matavire and Brown, 2011). Understanding this debate can teach us much about the important metaphor of emergence in grounded theory studies in the IS field.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Emergence and Forcing in Information Systems Grounded Theory Studies: The Case of Strauss and Corbin

Seidel

Urquhart

2013

Journal of Information Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grounded theory method (GTM), which has been increasingly used in the information systems (IS) field, is a contested method. GTM has even been viewed as a family of methods by Antony Bryant and Kathy Charmaz in the respected 'Handbook of Grounded Theory'. One debate that is of particular relevance is about the metaphor of 'emergence' and the most basic rule of GTM -that researchers should not force preconceived conceptualizations on data. This debate has its origins in a dispute between the two co-founders of grounded theory, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss. Glaser criticized Strauss for the introduction of the stage of axial coding and the use of one single coding paradigm. In his view, the paradigm is too rigid, forces data, hinders emergence, and leads to conceptual description instead of grounded theory. It is perhaps surprising then, that this debate has so far been conducted without any empirical evidence in support of the proposition that the Strauss and Corbin version of grounded theory might result in forcing. In this article, we analyse IS studies in top journals where Straussian grounded theory procedures -which have found most adherents in the IS discipline -are utilized. We provide detailed insights into the use and the impact of axial coding and the coding paradigm. We find that the researchers' use of Straussian coding procedures in the IS field is on a level that is conscious and deliberative. We relate our findings to the broader debate about the contested nature of GTM, and find that axial coding and the coding paradigm are an exemplar that shows that GTM is an evolving method that is subject to idiosyncratic interpretations and flexible deployment. Our findings, we argue, are in line with the more recent development of constructivist grounded theory that holds that grounded theories are not discovered, they are constructed, based on conscious decisions and interpretive acts. We also put forward three propositions, and five guidelines, intended to assist IS researchers in constructing grounded theories using Straussian coding procedures, while adhering to the primacy of avoiding preconceptions.

show abstract

“…This sort of development might be particularly helpful, for example, for researchers who use grounded theory approaches. There is quite a bit of controversy about the procedures that should be employed or the types of questions that should structure data analysis in grounded theory, 29,30,39,40 and a thorough positioning of a study_s method in relation to various points of controversy could easily consume the number of words normally allocated for an entire research article. In contrast, referring to one or another set of guidelines accepted in the field might make such positioning feasible.…”

Section: Discussion and Implications For Behavioral Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounded Theory and Backward Mapping: Exploring the Implementation Context for Wraparound

Walker

Koroloff

2007

J Behav Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within children's mental health, there is an increasing demand for wider implementation of wraparound and other interventions that can provide comprehensive, individualized, family-driven care. Unfortunately, implementation has proven difficult because these approaches do not necessarily flourish within traditionally organized agencies and systems. This has highlighted the need for information about how mental health agencies and systems must evolve if they are to provide a hospitable implementation environment for these interventions. A first step in developing this information is through research that advances conceptual and theoretical understanding of the impact of contextual factors on implementation. At the same time, there is an immediate need for practical information to guide decision making and policy development in settings where implementation is being undertaken. This article describes a study of wraparound implementation that used a combination of qualitative strategies to meet both of these needs simultaneously. It is argued that these strategies are particularly well suited to the study of emerging practices that reflect-and help drive-transformation in mental health systems.

show abstract

Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy

Cited by 74 publications

References 0 publications

Grounded theory in psychological research.

Grounded theory in psychological research.

On Emergence and Forcing in Information Systems Grounded Theory Studies: The Case of Strauss and Corbin

Grounded Theory and Backward Mapping: Exploring the Implementation Context for Wraparound

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About