It seems to me that a growing number of research papers in the coaching literature are mentioning ‘grounded theory’ as their research method. So it seemed useful to explain what it is.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method developed by sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss in the 1960s. It is primarily used to generate theory from data, systematically gathered and analyzed through the research process. In grounded theory, data collection, analysis, and eventual theory stand in close relationship to one another. Here’s a detailed look at the method, its advantages and disadvantages, and its academic reception.
What is Grounded Theory?
Grounded theory involves a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived grounded theory about a phenomenon. It is designed to discover what problems exist in a given social environment and how the persons involved handle them; it aims to derive theories from systematic analyses, which are grounded in data gathered from the field.
Steps in Grounded Theory Research
- Data Collection: This is primarily done through interviews, observations, and document reviews.
- Open Coding: Data are broken down into discrete parts, closely examined, and compared for similarities and differences.
- Axial Coding: Data are put back together in new ways by making connections between categories.
- Selective Coding: The coding process focuses on selecting the core category, systematically relating it to other categories, validating those relationships, and filling in categories that need further refinement.
- Theorizing: The researcher develops a theoretical framework based on the relationships among categories.
Pros of Grounded Theory
- Flexibility: Adaptable to new and complex areas where little is previously known.
- Richness of Data: Generates theories that are closely connected to the data.
- Openness: Encourages openness and remains sensitive to the data, allowing new insights to emerge.
- Iterative Process: The cyclic process of going back and forth between data and analysis enhances depth of theory.
Cons of Grounded Theory
- Time-Consuming: The method requires significant time for data collection and analysis.
- Complexity in Coding: Managing, sorting, and analyzing large amounts of data can be overwhelming.
- Subjectivity: The high level of researcher involvement can lead to bias, influencing the categories and the development of theory.
- Requires Skill and Experience: Effective use of this method depends heavily on the researcher’s analytical skills and familiarity with the process.
Academic Respect and Usage
Grounded theory is highly respected in many academic fields, particularly in social sciences, nursing, education, and health research, where understanding the complexity of human behavior and interactions is crucial. Its respect stems from its rigorous methodological approach and its potential to yield impactful, practical theories that can inform policy and practice. However, the method is also critiqued for the reasons mentioned above, particularly regarding the potential for researcher bias and the challenges of ensuring reproducibility and generalizability of the results.
Grounded theory remains a powerful tool in qualitative research, widely used and respected for its unique ability to derive deep insights from qualitative data.
