Constructivist Grounded Theory

Historically grounded theory has engaged with ‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions. According to Charmaz (2008) most qualitative research has not answered the ‘why’ questions that generally rest with a positivist inquiry. The term grounded theory ‘refers to both the research product and the analytic method of producing it’ (p. 397). A social constructionist approach assists the involvement of ‘why’ questions. Where a constructionist grounded theorist attends to the what and how, the objectivist grounded theorist has its genealogy in positivism, aiming to attend to the why questions. The differing emphases that are not entirely mutually exclusive, attend to the understanding and explanation. Glaser and Strauss adopted a limited form of social constructionism, however ‘their research reports emphasized generality, not relativity and objectivity, not reflexivity’ (Charmaz, 2008, p. 399). The difference between constructionism and social constructionism is ‘that one has an individual focus and the other a social focus on the world’ (Evans, 2013, p. 45).

As indicated earlier, the postmodern theorists challenged the assumptions of CGT methods which ‘spurred efforts to reclaim its strategies for social constructionist inquiry’ (Charmaz, 2008, p. 401). To differentiate between objectivist and constructionist methods, it appears the former assumes a single reality in that the data is self-evident and there is an aim to generalise through abstractions. A constructionist’s method assumes reality is multiple, processual and constructed, and that it occurs under the specific conditions. When applying this to practice, the interactions and positionality of both the researcher and research participants are considered, therefore, the research and reality are co-constructed (Charmaz, 2008). Constructionists aim for interpretive understandings of the studied phenomenon in the given context rather than an explanation. The constructionist approach requires the researcher to critically examine ‘their construction of the research process as they seek to analyse how their research participants construct their lives (Charmaz, 2006)’, advancing the objectivist approach by actively analysing their influence (Charmaz, 2008, pp. 402-403).

Charmaz (2014) coined the term constructivist grounded theory ‘to acknowledge the subjectivity and the researcher’s involvement in the construction and interpretation of data and to signal the differences between’ her approach and the traditional social constructionism of the 1980’s and early 1990s (p. 14). A more distinct feature of ConGT is that it treats research as a construction but recognises ‘it occurs under specific conditions – of which we may not be aware and which may not be our choosing’ (Charmaz, 2014, p. 13).

49 Constructivist grounded theory is defined as:

A contemporary version of grounded theory that adopts methodological strategies such as coding, memo-writing, and theoretical sampling of the original statement of the method but shifts its epistemological foundations and takes into account methodological development in qualitative inquiry occurring over the past fifty years (Charmaz, 2014, p. 342).

Charmaz (2008) highlights the four principles essential for a constructivist grounded theorist to reflect in practice. These are summarised as:

▪ ‘treat the research process itself as a social construction’ – ‘responding to emergent questions, new insights and further information and simultaneously constructing the method of analysis, as well as the analysis’;

▪ ‘scrutinize research decisions and directions’ – ‘think through what they are doing and how and why they are doing it’, reflexivity is essential to this revision and leads to, ▪ ‘improvise methodological and analytic strategies throughout the research process’;

and

▪ ‘collect sufficient data to discern and document how research participants construct their lives and worlds’ – ‘to understand how research participants construct their world, researchers need to know that world’ (p. 403).

A significant aspect of the constructivist approach to grounded theory is that researchers who adopt this approach, study how and sometimes why, while looking at how people view their situation. It is the theorising and interpretive work of people which results in a theory; interpretation developed from the researcher’s view. The research reality is a situation that encompasses all the differing contextual and time realities; typically, the multiple realities, interactions, positions, beliefs and values (Charmaz, 2014).

The data that is collected will influence which phenomena the researcher sees and how they make sense of it. It is the process of coding that provides theoretical foundation of a conceptual infrastructure that integrates the participant’s narrative. The process involves choosing words that constitute capturing our view of someone else’s reality, thus we identify what we see as important, focussing on what people may say, and when and how they might say it in the coding process (Charmaz, 2006). During the analysis, the researcher interacts closely and delves deeply into the data, becoming familiar with the participants' perceptions

50

of the situation. Language is utilised to describe human experience and meaning, through observed realities. The coding process provides the opportunity to look at the data in another way and minimises the risk of the student researcher influencing the data with their own personal values and beliefs.

A ConGT emphasis is on studying processes, what people are doing to understand their actions and moving away from static analysis.

These layers could include a person’s (1) stated explanation of his or her action, (2) unstated assumptions about it, (3) intentions for engaging in it, (4) effects on others, and (5) consequences for further individual action and interpersonal relations. Throughout the research process, look at action in relation to meaning to help you obtain thick description and develop your categories (Charmaz, 2015, p. 64).

Within a constructivist paradigm there is the belief that there are many truths and realities, and that people construct meaning from their own experiences, perceptions and desires, in the context of their environment. Therefore, it is important to remain open to all possible understandings and retain a level of openness and curiosity about the world. People construct data and though we may treat documents, stories, reports data, texts, historical records as facts, however it must be understood that these have been constructed by individuals (Charmaz, 2014).

As highlighted earlier, it is important to understand that all research starts with a person’s view of the world because it shapes the whole research process. ‘It is our ontological and epistemological positions that shape the very questions we might ask in the first place, how we pose them and how we set about answering them ‘(Grix, 2002, p. 179). In this study, the research question guided my decision to choose a grounded theory method and my ontological (constructivism) and epistemological (interpretivism) positions aligned with Charmaz’s methodological approach Constructivist Grounded Theory.