Constructing Grounded

Theory

Grounded theory

Grounded theory does not test a hypothesis. It sets out to find theory that accounts for our observations. It’s an inductive process

Rigour in grounded theory comes from its responsiveness to the situation; a continuing search for evidence which disconfirms the emerging theory.

Data

• All is data - everything that gets in the researcher’s way

• Interviews, observations, field notes of lectures, meetings, newspaper articles, TV shows, conversations, self-interviews

NO’s?• No pre-research literature review. Literature of the

area under study gives preconceptions about what to find and the researcher gets desensitized by borrowed concepts. The literature should instead be read in the sorting stage being treated as more data to code and compare with what has already been coded and generated.

• No taping. Taping is counterproductive and a waste of time - the researcher delimits her data by field-noting interviews and soon after generates concepts that fit with data, are relevant and work in explaining what participants are doing to resolve their main concern.

• No talk. Talking about the theory before it is written up can either render praise or criticism, and both diminish the motivational drive to write memos that develop and refine the concepts and the theory

Grounded theory process

- background information

- from interviews, observations

- finding themes/concepts

- generating theories/propositions

- - axial coding

Grounded Theory – the band

"Ecological Global Crisis Awareness and the effect on the planet: the

human response”• What did you experience when you did the

carbon footprint questionnaire and when you reflected upon the outcome?

• In pairs, take notes, swap• Identify themes (propositions, assumptions,

key ideas)• In groups, discuss themes, can you cluster

them?

Axial Coding - 2nd level codingElement Description• Phenomenon The name of the theme - the concept that

holds the bits together. • Causal conditions the events or variables that lead to

the occurrence or development of the phenomenon. • Context linked with causal conditions. Context includes: – Intervening conditions : Other variables and events

that influence the phenomena– Action strategies: The purposeful, goal-oriented

activities that participants perform in response to the phenomenon and intervening conditions.

– Consequences: These are the consequences of the action strategies, intended and unintended.

Data comparison

process – constant

comparison

Other key concepts• Saturation In collecting and interpreting data,

eventually extra interviews add nothing to what you already know about a category, its properties, and its relationship to the core category. Saturation is reached – cease collecting about that category.

• Theoretical sampling - deciding whom to interview or what to observe next according to the state of theory generation. This can happen from the first interview

• Checking context - the need to compare between phenomena and contexts to make the theory strong.

Validity – being well-grounded or justifiable; at once relevant and meaningful

• Fit - how closely concepts fit with the incidents they are representing, and this is related to how thoroughly the constant comparison of incidents to concepts was done.

• Relevance. the "grab" that captures our attention – seeming to match real concern of participants,

• Workability. The theory works when it explains how the issues are understood and managed with much variation.

• Modifiability. Theory can be altered when new relevant data is compared to existing data. Grounded theory is never right or wrong, it just has more or less fit, relevance, workability and modifiability.

Criteria for judging emerging theory• It should fit the phenomenon, provided it has

been carefully derived from diverse data and is adherent to the common reality of the area;

• It should provide understanding, and be understandable;

• Because the data is comprehensive, it should provide generality, in that the theory includes extensive variation and is abstract enough to be applicable to a wide variety of contexts; and

• It should provide control, in the sense of stating the conditions under which the theory applies and describing a reasonable basis for action.

Grounded Theory - strengths

• Research is free from the bias of literature – mainly reflecting western ideologies

• Theory emerges from the data – data is not made to fit the theory

• The method is able to respond to emerging ideas

• Gets detailed information but is efficient• Provides a strong information base for

surveys

Grounded theory - weakness

• Difficult to define saturation – the point where no new ideas are emerging

• Difficult to generalise from as the questions have changed across the process

• Lack of transcript use means that interviews are filtered by the researcher’s ideas of what’s emerging

• Harder to manage ethically

Setting Up the Interview

• BSocP student at Unitec taking part in a research project: on how people are thinking about the future, in relation to changing levels of natural resources and energy resources available in the world.

• Would you be interested in being interviewed about your ideas and opinions on these issues?

Creating Interview Questions

• Larry Davidson: “Strategies for Interviewing”• Begin with descriptive questions. Not asking

for assesements (though you may get them). You are after a rich description of experience.

• Move to simple evaluations. Likes and dislikes, and what is behind these.

• Then get to major evaluations, after the experiential groundwork has been done.

Creating Interview Questions

• Next are solutions/resolutions. Social practice explored solutions; finish on a hopeful note.

• Confirming questions. Key hypotheses can be checked with simple and direct questions.

• Demographic questions. What contexts influence the answers to the questions? Age, gender, culture, spiritual orientation, education, occupation and income?

Drafting the Interview Questions

• As a class: develop a descriptive question about the experience completing the carbon footprint measure.

• We may need a question that explores the interviewee’s knowledge about resource depletion. I leave that to Geoff to facilitate!

• Next: practicing the interview, using questions developed last year.

Setting Up the Interview

• We’ll need about 1 and ½ hours to meet• Ideally a quiet, comfortable place where there

won’t be any distractions• I’ll start by asking you to fill in a brief survey

about your own use of resources (“carbon footprint”), which we can use as a basis for discussion

• The interview will take about 45 minutes and will be tape-recorded, for confidential use for the research project (about 32 interviewees).

Developing Rapport• If you don’t know the interviewee well:– Do your greetings and chat briefly about

something or a person that connects you, or just talk about the weather, life in general, etc

• Have a cup of tea, etc, get settled. Perhaps bring kai with you for connection and sharing.

• Go over what is expected (in detail if you haven’t had a previous face-to-face conversation)

Use an Information Sheet to:

• Explain the purpose of the interview and clarify any doubts• Address issues of confidentiality, risk and

withdrawal.• Explain the format of the interview, how long

it takes, how it will be recorded• Explain what feedback will be provided• Provide contact information of the

interviewer

Qualities of a good interviewer• Informed – they have many ideas about where the

topic might go• Prepared – they are clear about what they

investigating, and have clear and accessible questions. • Engaged – they are deeply interested in the nuances of

the participant’s discourse• Reflective – follow up on hints and paradoxes, checking

that their interpretation is correct. • Remembering – they don’t ask questions about areas

that have already come up in answers to previous questions.

• Consistent – they ensure that all areas that they needed to cover in the interview have been covered.

What to do• Ask open-ended questions • Ask questions that allow participants to describe

situations and events relevant to the topic • Ask specific, detailed questions in the participant’s

own language• Ask only one question at a time• Ask questions that imply a before, during, and after • Follow the person’s lead• Show interest with nonverbal (leaning forward,

showing concern, looking, nodding) and verbal affirmations “oh”, “mmm”, “ah”, “I see”

• Demonstrate comfort by having a relaxed disposition and posture.

What not to do • Avoid asking closed-ended questions or questions that

ask for levels of agreement, except for confirmation purposes at the end.

• Avoid asking abstract, complex or compound questions • Avoid pursuing areas of clear discomfort • Avoid interrupting the person, don’t rush into the gaps,

be silent while people are thinking• Avoid extreme reactions to any particular details• Avoid agreeing or disagreeing or giving advice• Avoid asking “why" questions early – evaluative

questions should come late in the interview • Take care about asking people about their thoughts,

feelings, or other "internal" states – often these are private or hard to access.

Clarifications and Finishing• When you receive a minimal or unclear answer to

a question seek clarification: use prompts.• If the interviewee doesn’t want to say more

about a particular question, that’s OK• TOWARDS THE END of the interview, check to

see that you have not missed any questions. Fill in any gaps.

• Debrief: When you’ve finished the questions ask them how was it for them to engage in the interview.