How to Collect Data for Grounded Theory Design

How to Collect Data for Grounded Theory Design Mark Mc. Caslin

Begin with the End in Mind • What is theory? • Late Latin theoria from Greek theōria. Meaning contemplation, speculation; a looking at, viewing; a sight, show, spectacle, things looked at, or; from theōrein. Meaning to consider, speculate, look at, or; from theōros. Meaning spectator, to view, to see, or to perceive.

Positivist Definition of Theory (Charmaz, 2006) • A statement of relationships between abstract concepts that cover a wide range of empirical observations. Positivist view theoretical constructs as variables for hypothesis testing. The objectives of theory for positivist is explanation and prediction. • Positivist theory seeks causes, favors deterministic explanations, and emphasizes generality and universality. • Treat concepts as variables • Specify relationships between concepts • Explain and predict these relationships • Systematize Knowledge • Verify theoretical relationships through hypothesis testing • Generate hypotheses for research.

Interpretive Definition of Theory (Charmaz, 2006) • An interpretive approach to theory emphasizes understanding rather than explanation. • Interpretive theory calls for the imaginative understanding of the study’s phenomenon. This type of theory assumes emergent, multiple realities; indeterminacy; facts and values as linked; truth as provisional; and social life as processual. • Conceptualize the studied phenomenon to understand it in abstract terms. • Articulate theoretical claims pertaining to, scope, depth, power, and relevance. • Acknowledge subjectivity hence the role of negotiation, dialog, and understanding • Offer an imaginative understanding

• Two camps in grounded theory Interpretive Theory • Constructivist Grounded Theory (Charmaz) • A constructivist grounded theory recognizes that the viewer creates the data and ensuing analysis through interaction with the viewed. Data do not provide a window on reality. Rather, the ‘discovered’ reality arises from the interactive process and its temporal, cultural, and structural contexts. • Reference: groundedtheoryreview • Objectivist Grounded Theory (Corbin & Strauss; Glaser) • Objectivist grounded theory assumes the reality of an external world, takes for granted a neutral observer, views categories as derived from data, and sees representation of data and subjects as non-problematic. • Reference: www. sciencedirect. com/topics/neuroscience/groundedtheory

A Grounded Theory • Regardless of the type of grounded theory the purpose is to discover a substantive theory or theoretical position based upon imaginative understanding over explanation and prediction. • Note: A theoretical position is operationally defined, basically, as an emergent theoretical imaginative understanding within a discipline or study on a certain matter on which a position is chosen from promising and multiple realities as revealed by the data.

Is there a Relationship Between Theory and Practice? • For Aristotle, both practice and theory involve thinking, but the aims are different. • Theoretical contemplation considers things humans do not move or change, such as nature, so it has no human aim apart from itself and the knowledge it helps create. • On the other hand, praxis involves thinking, but always with an aim to desired actions, whereby humans cause change or movement themselves for their own ends. • This is constructivism! “He who loves practice without theory is like the sailor who boards ship without a rudder and compass and never knows where he may cast. ” Leonardo da Vinci “Anecdote can tell you a lot more than abstract theory. ” Studs Terkel

Data Collection • What might a path between data collection and data analysis look like? • Grounded Theory primarily uses interviews to collect data.

Things to Consider • 1. Who is in your sample? A. list (in bullets) the inclusion criteria B. list (in bullets) the exclusion criteria • 2. Sampling Method A. Purposeful based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria B. Is Snowball appropriate to include in your study? • 3. Sampling size: Typically 10 to 30 participants with the final determination to be based on data saturation. Mason, Mark (2010). Sample Size and Saturation in Ph. D Studies Using Qualitative Interviews [63 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), Art. 8, http: //nbnresolving. de/urn: nbn: de: 0114 -fqs 100387.

Data Saturation • While there are specifics on what saturation entails within grounded theory as expounded by its founders Glaser and Strauss, like theoretical sampling and the saturation of categories (Charmaz 2000), it is not clear what saturation means in other qualitative approaches. • Theoretical Saturation refers to the point at which gathering more data about a theoretical category reveals no new properties nor yields any further theoretical insights about the emerging theory (Charmaz, 2006) • The purpose of theoretical sampling is to sample to develop theoretical categories. • Homogeneous vs. Heterogenous sample.

Recruitment • Are there social media sites where you will recruit? (1) Are there specific Facebook groups where you will recruit? You will need to ask the moderator of the Facebook group for permission to post information about the study. You will create an announcement and ask the moderator to post it. (You may not post on your own Facebook page or your own social media account. That’s a conflict of interest. ) (2) Will you buy targeted adds on social media? • Will you request that an organization sends emails to its members? (You will write the email so that you have control of the content but a person in the organization who has administrative authority will send it out. )

Interviewing This article, aimed at the novice researcher, is written to address the increased need to develop research protocols or interview guides to meet the requirements set by IRBs and human subjects review committees. When data collection involves conducting qualitative interviews, the instruments include the researcher and the interview questions. The value of the data collected during a qualitative interview depends on the competence of the researcher and the strength of the interview questions. For this reason, it is important to ensure that the interview questions used by novice researchers are appropriate and capable of supporting their efforts to reach their goal of acquiring a detailed answer to the research question. This article expands upon the ideas presented by various authors about the topic of developing robust qualitative interview questions. It provides guidelines that can be used to develop an interview guide that adds structure to the interview process, as well as provides transparency of methods to human subjects review committees and IRBs, while at the same time allows flexibility within the interview process. Various types of interview questions are described and working examples are included. • "Qualitative Interview Questions: Guidance for Novice Researchers" by Rosanne E. Roberts Dr. (nova. edu)

Planning the Initial Interview • In qualitative interviewing, the researcher strives for understanding by encouraging informants to describe their world in their own terms and to provide in-depth details of their successes and concerns on the research topic. During the initial interview, the researcher poses the framing, main, and probing questions to a small homogeneous pool of informants and records their responses (Creswell, 1994; Patton, 1987; Rubin & Rubin, 1995). • The researcher listens with a “big ear” (Glaser, 2001, p. 175). In doing so, the researcher plays a relatively passive role in the initial interview to become familiar with the research ecology.

Interview Protocol • The main questions and accompanying probes are • Worded broadly enough to encourage the informant to express their thinking and knowledge, but narrow enough to provide specific data on the topic • Customized to draw out what the informant might know • Designed to cover the overall topic • Worded so it is easy for the informant to understand the question focus (Rubin & Rubin, 1995) • Worded to generate ideas that lead to further inquiry (Tanner, 2000) • Posed with nondirectional wording that describes rather than quantifies to avoid forcing responses (Creswell, 1998; Glaser, 1992).

Example Interview Protocol • Framing Question • How are dissertation topics discovered, developed, and chosen? • Main questions and probes 1. Where are you in your dissertation topic selection process? a. If you have an actual topic, what is it? b. If you don’t have a topic, what are some of your ideas of focus? c. If you are still in the early stages, what are some of your passions? 2. Why did you select this passion, focus, or topic? a. What are some of your personal connections to the topic? b. In what ways do you view this as comfortable or challenging topic? 3. What types of expertise do you bring to this topic? a. What kind of previous research have you done in this area? b. Who are possible mentors on the topic? c. What research methods have you used before? d. What research methods do you plan to use on this topic? 4. What is the end result of your research? a. How will your life be different after the project is completed? b. How will the topics be different upon completion? c. What are your goals for future development of the topic? Carlson, N. , & Mc. Caslin, M. (2003). Meta-inquiry: An approach to interview success. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 549 -569. Retrieved [Insert date], from http: //www. nova. edu/ssss/QR/QR 8 -4/carlson. pdf

Theory Generation • Concise statement of theory generated from data derived from the human ecology. Statement includes potential impacts theory may have on the ecology related to the phenomenon of interest. • The imaginative understanding of the study’s phenomenon of interest. • Questions to ask: • Are the definition of major categories or themes complete? • How have I increased my understanding of the phenomenon? • How does my emergent theory or theoretical position make a fresh contribution to the literature?

Example Congruous Autonomy is an enduring, self-efficacious belief in personal capability and compelling rightness and identity, inspiring commitment to extraordinary involvement in a pursuit (rich in lifetime patterns and trends), despite sacrifice and risk, to develop one’s highest potential. This theoretical position allows for all of the rich, thick features of our densely woven and sculptured tapestry to holistically display both the lived experience and the essential personal meaning of the experience for the informants.

Conditional Matrix • Multi-dimensional diagram or model for analyzing consequences of emerging relationships on the ecology and in disseminating theory meaning. • Conditional/consequential matrix is a coding device to show the intersections of the micro and macro conditions/consequences on the actions and to clarify the connections between them. (Charmaz, 2006)

Example of a Conditional Matrix (Graphic format) Inner Voice e ht g i , ce oi les Ch stac of t Ob ar ess P oc Pr Personal Criteria Congruous Autonomy Posi tive Forc e Ach iev t in emen S t eps Follo Inspir w at Conv ion, iction R s s ne Positive Force f, lie ty, Be nti e f Id el acy S fic Ef it r C , ria Epiph Risk/S any: acri Urgen fice cy t, en m op ing l ve ean e D M

Meaning of the Emerging Theory • Identifying impact of theory on current theoretical literature. • This requires a secondary literature review. This review hosts a ne attitude by the researcher. Instead of attempting to locate the study (problem) in theoretical and/or practical literature, the research is now seeking to extend or contribute to theory and practice. This is a critical step.

Consequences of the Emerging Theory • Verifying process that examines the emergent theory for fit and relevance to the human ecology. Checks for credibility, transferability, and dependability of emergent theory. • This process is directly connected to the Reflective Coding Matrix

Reflective coding matrix for defining conditions and dimensions of “Commitment to Extraordinary Involvement. ” Reflective Coding Matrix Core Category Commitment to Extraordinary Involvement Properties Process Position Perception Product Purpose Process Choice Conviction Belief Achievement Development Dimensions Context Modes for Understanding Consequences Ability to Adapt Focus on What’s Important Must be a Way Obstacles Part of Process Follow Threads of Inspiration Epiphany Sense of Autonomy Risk Negativity Age Factor Sense of Urgency Adversity Faith Open to Possibility Who I am Success Achievement Plan Keep Moving Forward Pursuit Evolved Learning the Craft Personal Expression Sense of Self-Worth Communicating Perspective Compelling Passion Creative Energy Challenge Personal Criteria Identity Personal Goal Meaning in Goal Momentum in a Direction Sacrificing Ordinary for Extraordinary Self-Efficacy Progressive Realization of Worthwhile Goals Maximizing Personal Potential Creates Positive Energy

Reflective Coding Matrix Logic Flow Mc. Caslin & Carlson

Selective Coding • Identifying key theoretical underpinnings of emerging theory. Story line, developed to reply to grand tour question, is rich description of core category and its related properties. • According to Strauss and Corbin (1990) selective coding (interpretation) is the process of selecting the core category, systematically relating it to other categories, validating those relationships, and filling in categories that need further refinement and development. Defined as such it is not a coding process but an interpretive process. During this process of interpreting the data the story line of theory grounded by the data begins to emerge. It was at this juncture that the data, the categories from open coding, the compressing of events or conditions into causal relationship in reflective coding, were broadened to paint a portrait of the ecology and an answer to the central research question. The core category and its domain serve as a reference point or as an aid for the development of the story line.

The Reflective Coding Matrix Grounded theory “analysis is the interplay between the researchers and the data” (Strauss & Corbin, 1998, p. 13). It is a creative process that is designed to build rather than test theory. Definition of Key Terms • Category: This is the unit of information analyzed in grounded theory research (Creswell, 2007, p. 237). They are concepts the stand for phenomena (Strauss and Corbin, 1998, p. 101). General (or open categories) are revealed through the hortizontalization of the data in open coding procedures. Code categories are the generalization of these open codes through axial or reflective coding. • Core Category (sometimes referred to as the central phenomenon): This is the overarching category that begins to reveal the emerging theory. It is the final collapse of data into a theoretical position. It leads to the format statement of theory that is supported by the data from which it emerged. • Properties: Characteristics of a category; the delineation of which defines and gives it meaning (Strauss and Corbin, 1998, p. 101). Properties are attributes of a category that appear during open coding. • Process: Is the pragmatic understanding of the emerging theory that is revealed through the conditional relationship guide. It reveals the dynamic aspects of the emerging theory and aids in interrelating the various properties to the core category. • Dimensional Range: the range along which general properties of a category vary; giving specification to a category and variation to theory. (Strauss and Corbin, 1998, p. 101). • Context: This is the reveal concerning where and how the emerging theory fits and/or relates with or to the ecology from which it was discovered. • Strategies for Understanding the Consequences of the Emerging Theory: This is the preliminary statement of the emerging theory. It is a verifying process that examines the emergent theory for fit and relevance to the human ecology. Checks for credibility, transferability, and dependability of emergent theory.

Axial Coding/Reflective Coding/Theoretical Coding • In grounded theory procedures axial coding is the answer to questions generated during open coding. The term axial does not generate the visual image of what is taking place during this procedure. Axial coding is the process of reflecting on and about the categories that are emerging and reassembling them in a meaningful way. That depth of that “meaningful way” is directly informed by the researcher’s experience with the phenomenon of interest and appropriateness or “fit” of theoretical sensitivity achieved. • Theoretical coding is a sophisticated level of coding that follows the codes you have selected in open or focused coding. • In short, this level of coding specify possible relationships between categories developed/discovered in open or focused coding. • The Conditional Relationship Guide (Scott, 2002) is a very useful tool for this process.

The Conditional Relationship Guide is formatted to ask and answer the relational questions about the emerging code category. • What is [the code category]? (Using an informant’s words helps avoid bias. ) • When does [the code category] occur? (Using “during…” helps form the answer. ) • Where does [the code category] occur? (Using “in…” helps form the answer. ) • Why does [the code category] occur? (Using “because…” helps form the answer. ) • How does [the code category] occur? (Using “by…” helps form the answer. ) • With what Consequence does [the code category] occur or is [the category] understood? "Relating the Categories in Grounded Theory Analysis: Using a Condition" by Karen Wilson Scott (nova. edu) Memo Writing

Open/Focused Coding • Open coding is an inductive, analytical procedure that performs two basic tasks: it makes comparisons and it asks questions. For this reason grounded theory is often referred to as the constant comparative method of analysis (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). • Open coding is the systematic process of sorting through the data, categorizing events and concepts by their properties and dimensional range. These categories are, during reflective (axial) coding related to each other to see how they interplay. Generally in grounded theory open and reflective (axial) coding happen within the confines of the same coding session (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). • Glaser recommends the analyst constantly ask three questions: • What is this data a study of? • What category or property of a category, of what part of the emerging theory, does this incident indicate? • What is actually happening in the data? (p. 57). • In open coding, the data must be analyzed line by line, coding each sentence. This can begin with an overview approach in which the analyst somewhat quickly reads over all the data to yield, “an impressionistic cluster of categories” (p. 58) but each line must be analyzed in order to verify and saturate categories. Memos facilitate the decision to move from open to axial to selective coding.