Classical Grounded Theory
Classical grounded theory, what’s this qualitative method all about? What are the core principles and ideas? Keep reading, because I’m going to explain it all!
Okay, grounded theory.
So, basically, instead of starting with a theory and trying to make sense of your data using that theory, grounded theory flips the script. You start with the data, rather than starting with the theory.
It builds theories from scratch, based on what's happening out there in the social world, the data you’re generating from your research.
You start with the data, rather than starting with the theory. I already said that, I know! But it’s important so worth repeating!
It’s like assembling a jigsaw puzzle without the picture on the box.
Instead of researching or testing based on existing ideas (that's deductive), grounded theory starts with the nitty-gritty details and works up to the big ideas (that's inductive).
There are three main versions of grounded theory, associated with the scholars who developed them.
Classical - Barney Glaser’s and Anselm Strauss’s classic grounded theory.
Interpretivist - Anselm Strauss’s grounded theory.
Constructivist - Kathy Charmaz’s constructivist grounded theory.
In this blogpost, we’re going to look at Classical grounded theory.
This is an introductory guide which aims to give you an idea of what grounded theory is all about. In the process of simplifying some of the material around it to help beginners, I’ve probably lost some of the nuances. And I offer zero apologies for that because we’ve all got to start somewhere, okay?! But if you want to chuck your two cents in and help people understand those nuances, that would be awesome, that’s what the comments are for.
If we’ve not met before, hi, I’m Dr Elizabeth Yardley and I’ve got two decades worth of experience in supporting social science students though their graduate dissertations.
Qualitative approaches are certainly my jam. I love them because they are so flexible and adaptable. You can really make them your own.
However, because you’ve got quite a lot of room for manoeuvre in the qualitative world, that can throw up a lot of confusion and uncertainty, argh! In my blogposts, I want to keep things simple and help you make progress.
So, I’m going to stop jabbering now and we’re going to dive in.
Classical grounded theory – what is it?
Classical grounded theory, pioneered by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss, is like the OG of grounded theory approaches. It's all about stripping away preconceived notions and diving headfirst deep into the data to discover patterns and relationships.
Grounded theory concerns itself with understanding human experiences around social interaction. It comes from ideas like symbolic interactionism, which say that reality isn’t this cold, hard, fixed thing, it’s something we create through our interactions, and that these interactions shape who we are.
In grounded theory, we focus on how we construct our identities through interacting with others in society. We use symbols, signs, and language to make sense of our experiences. We're always thinking about how others see us and how we fit into society through norms – things that are normal and expected of us in particular scenarios.
This approach to research looks at life as it's happening, focusing on what's actually going on in the world around us.
Grounded theory is similar to ethnography in that it starts with observations to understand how things work, aiming to develop relevant theory. It was developed in the 1960s by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss, who wanted to shift research from just following existing theories to creating new ones based on real-life observations.
The main goal of grounded theory is to develop theories that explain what's happening in a specific context. It's particularly useful for studying smaller-scale environments where there hasn't been much research before.
So, what are some of its key elements?
Key Element 1: Constant comparison
One key aspect of classical grounded theory is its focus on constant comparison. This involves comparing data points to each other in order to identify similarities and differences, allowing researchers to develop categories and concepts that emerge organically from the data itself. What does that even mean? Example time!
Let’s say a researcher is conducting a study on how individuals cope with stress in the workplace. Through interviews with various employees, they gather a wealth of data about different strategies and behaviors.
In the constant comparison process, the researcher might start by analysing one interview transcript and identifying themes or patterns related to coping mechanisms, such as seeking social support or engaging in relaxation techniques.
As they move on to the next interview, they continually compare the emerging themes from the new data with those identified in the previous interviews. They constantly compare.
They might notice similarities, such as multiple participants mentioning the importance of taking breaks during stressful periods, or differences, such as contrasting views on the effectiveness of meditation as a coping strategy.
By systematically comparing and contrasting data points across interviews, the researcher begins to refine and develop categories and concepts that accurately capture the range of experiences and perspectives within the data set.
This iterative (doing something again and again, usually to improve it) process allows for the emergence of new insights and theories that are grounded in the lived experiences of the participants, rather than being imposed from external theories or frameworks.
Key Element 2: Theoretical sampling
Another hallmark of classical grounded theory is theoretical sampling. Rather than collecting data randomly, researchers purposefully select new participants or sources of information based on emerging theories and concepts. This is another iterative process, which helps refine and validate the developing theory.
For example, let's say a researcher is conducting a study on how students adapted to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Initially, they might interview a diverse group of students to gather a range of perspectives on the challenges and opportunities of remote education.
As the researcher begins to analyse the data, certain patterns and themes start to emerge. They notice students who had reliable internet access and access to quiet study spaces tended to adapt more easily to online learning compared to those who faced connectivity issues or home distractions.
Based on this initial analysis, the researcher might develop a preliminary theory suggesting that access to resources plays a crucial role in students' adaptation to online learning. To further explore and validate this theory, they decide to purposefully select new participants for interviews based on their access to resources.
For instance, they might purposefully seek out students from low-income backgrounds or rural areas where internet access is limited. By intentionally selecting participants who represent different dimensions of the emerging theory, the researcher can gather more nuanced data to refine and validate their hypotheses.
Through this iterative process of theoretical sampling, the researcher continues to refine and develop their theory, ensuring it accurately reflects the complexities of students' experiences with online learning. By selecting participants based on emerging theories and concepts, theoretical sampling enhances the depth and validity of grounded theory research.
Key Element 3: Open coding
Open coding is another fundamental technique in classical grounded theory. It involves systematically analysing data to identify and categorise concepts or themes. Unlike more structured coding methods, open coding allows for flexibility and creativity, enabling researchers to capture the richness and complexity of their data.
For example, let's consider a research project exploring the experiences of individuals living with chronic illness. During the open coding process, the researcher begins by thoroughly examining the data, which could include interview transcripts, field notes, or diary entries from participants.
As they get into the data, the researcher identifies various concepts, experiences, and themes that emerge. These could range from physical symptoms and treatment regimens to emotional struggles and social support networks. Unlike more structured coding methods, open coding allows the researcher to approach the data with a flexible and exploratory mindset.
For instance, they might encounter a passage where a participant describes the challenges of managing multiple medications and appointments. This could lead to the creation of a code or category related to "treatment burden" or "medical logistics." Similarly, they might come across narratives about the importance of supportive friends and family members, prompting the creation of codes like "social support" or "emotional well-being."
Through open coding, the researcher can capture the richness and complexity of the participants' experiences in their own words, without imposing preconceived categories or assumptions. This approach fosters a deeper understanding of the phenomena under investigation and allows for the emergence of new insights and connections within the data.
Key Element 4: Researcher Role
This is one of the areas where classical grounded theory differs from interpretivist and constructivist approaches.
In classical grounded theory, the researcher is viewed as relatively neutral.
They take a passive role in receiving data, without inserting their own biases or preferences. It's not about the researcher's interactions with the participant; they maintain a certain distance from the data to better observe clear patterns.
Instead of focusing on their own perspective, they seek out patterns from the diverse viewpoints shared by participants.
In contrast, interpretivist and constructivist approaches often acknowledge the researcher's subjectivity and actively engage with their role in shaping the research process and interpreting the data.
Learn more about qualitative approaches
I hope you’ve found this introduction to grounded theory helpful!
If you’re into all things qualitative, be sure to checkout my series of other blogposts on qualitative methods by clicking here!
If there’s a qualitative approach you’d like to see me cover, drop me a quick note via this contact form, and I’d be happy to write one!