Grounded Theory Method

Grounded Theory Method (GTM) originated from the personal experiences of Anselm Strauss and Barney Glaser each undergoing the emotional phenomenon of family bereavement (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007). Strauss was strongly influenced by pragmatist and interactionist writings (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Glaser arrived to the partnership with a strong interest in theory development and training in quantitative research methods (Oktay, 2012). The partnership resulted in the generation of a methodology that emphasized “middle range” theories, theories that develop from and are directly applicable to “real world” situations (Dey, 1999). Strauss and Glaser sought to create a method that bridged the divide between the, then considered unscientific, qualitative research methods and the abstract conceptual theories of sociology of the 1950’s and 1960’s (Gouling, 2002). GTM was first presented in 1967 by Glaser and Strauss in their book The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007). The book detailed the rationale for using continual systematic gathering and analysis of data. It also encouraged new and creative research in topics that were viewed, at the time, as researchable only via quantitative means (Gouling, 2002). GTM evolved from that point as new researchers began to develop and refine the concepts that underlie the method. Today, GTM is the dominant qualitative methodology (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007).

Grounded Theory is a methodology that emphasizes the constant cyclical flow of data collection and data analysis by the researcher to construct a theory or model of the phenomenon under study (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007; Gouling, 2002; Oktay, 2012; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

The use of GTM for this study is appropriate for my desire to form a model of the characteristics of effective environmental education within Ontario’s centres. GTM has an emphasis upon theory

development (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007; Dey, 1999; Gibbs, 2010). In contrast, other qualitative methods aim for detailed descriptions of the participant’s experience; phenomenology focuses on the meaning an individual ascribes to a phenomenon, ethnography focuses on the cultural or social linkages between individuals, case studies focus on a single program, event, or process, and narrative studies focus on the participant’s life story (Creswell, 2009; Oktay, 2012).

GTM follows the familiar steps in research processes; initiating the research, selecting, collecting, and analysing the data, and concluding the research (Dey, 1999). GTM as a methodology has unique characteristics for each of the steps.

The first step in GTM is the confirmation that GTM is indeed the correct methodology to follow (Oktay, 2012). The researcher needs to perform an examination of not only their research goals but of their own abilities and interests (Oktay, 2012). The researcher needs to consider if their goals is to develop theory, if they are comfortable with proceeding into data collection without theoretical preconceptions, and whether they have the time and resources to undertake the multi-stage process of data collection and analysis virtually simultaneously (Dey, 1999; Oktay, 2012). Strauss and Corbin (1998) wrote that the researcher has to:

maintain a balance between the qualities of objectivity and sensitivity when doing analysis. Objectivity enables the researcher to have confidence that his or her findings are a

reasonable, impartial representation of the problem under investigation, whereas

sensitivity enables creativity and the discovery of new theory from data. (Strauss & Corbin, 1998 p. 53)

The GTM researcher also needs to understand the iterative nature of GTM that requires continual personal reflection to examine how their personal experiences and preconceived ‘pet theories’ can affect the outcome of their research (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007). Research using GTM involves the researcher in the study, requiring a researcher personality that is capable of dealing with the issues and thoughts that are revealed in their data collection and analysis (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007; Oktay, 2012). The second step in the research process is the selection of the data. In GTM data is obtained using theoretical sampling. Theoretical sampling is:

Data gathering driven by concepts derived from the evolving theory and based on the concept of ‘making comparisons,’ whose purpose is to go to places, people, or events that will maximize opportunities to discover variations among concepts and to densify

categories in terms of their properties and dimensions. (Strauss & Corbin, 1998 p. 201)

Strauss and Corbin (1998) expand on their definition by stating that theoretical sampling is cumulative and it becomes more specific as the study progresses. This type of sampling is in contrast with

conventional sampling techniques, principally in quantitative research, where the sampling protocol is explicitly established before data collection occurs (Dey, 1999). In GTM the emerging theory drives the next sampling process in an effort to explore important dimensions and themes in the study’s

progression (Oktay, 2012). Attempting to pre-arrange a thorough sampling framework in GTM research removes the study from the in-situ reality from which a theory is derived; thereby nullifying its

‘grounded’ credibility (Dey, 1999). The GTM researcher therefore begins their data collection with initial decisions concerning the group or site of study, the type of data that will be elicited from participants, and the amount of time devoted to each site; all decided using the practical realities of time and resources available (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). During the initial data collection, the GTM researcher begins their data analysis in order to begin assembling their next target(s) of the theoretical sample (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007; Dey, 1999; Gouling, 2002; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The researcher selects the

next sites not for cases of representation but rather for comparison and for conceptual variation (Dey, 1999).

The collection and analysis of the data occur concurrently in GTM (Gouling, 2002). The cyclical nature of data collection, data analysis, memoing, theoretical memo creation, and category refinement is

fundamentally what gives GTM the ability to create theories that are grounded in the reality of the study subjects (Oktay, 2012; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). A diagram illustrating the processes involved in GTM is found below in Figure 3.

Figure 3 - Process of Grounded Theory Methodology

Bold lines represent components that re-occur in multiple cycles

Adapted from: (Charmaz, 2006 in Oktay, 2012 p. 89) and (Strübing in Bryant, 2007 p. 595)

The adherence to the cyclical nature of the process results in data that draws from many different relevant sources. The theoretical concepts have a basis in real phenomena as the researcher contemplates and explores the alternatives that can support or discount their tentative theory construction (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

The usage of memos, both theoretical and observational, is another characteristic of GTM (Gouling, 2002). A memo is “the researcher’s record of analysis, thoughts, interpretations, questions, and directions for further data collection” (Strauss & Corbin, 1998 p. 110). They are used to organize the researcher’s ideas surrounding the study so that they may later review and sort them to uncover

concepts. The researcher can then begin to group these memos into certain concept groups that share a linkage to each other; based on similarities or differences, or based on substantive connections (Dey, 1999). The researcher examines these concept groups to reveal explanations about the phenomenon under study, and then challenges their construction of understanding by attempting to discover instances where agreement or disagreement could occur. The cycle of data collection, analysis, and theory construction repeats until the researcher reaches ‘theoretical saturation’. Theoretical saturation is “the point in category development at which no new properties, dimensions, or relationships emerge during analysis” (Strauss & Corbin, 1998 p. 143). At this point the researcher needs to re-examine their work once again, to ensure that as much novel data has been collected as possible. “Once the

researcher is convinced that they understand what they see, can identify it in many forms, and it appears culturally consistent, then the category may be considered saturated and sampling may cease” (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007 p. 243). The linkages and relationships between these saturated categories are then examined by the researcher to present a theory that explains a phenomenon (Oktay, 2012). The last step in GTM is theory quality assurance. “The real merit of a substantive theory lies in its ability to speak specifically for the populations from which it was derived and to apply back to them” (Strauss & Corbin, 1998 p. 267). To Oktay (2012), a valid theory is one “when practitioners who work with the

population I studied find my findings consistent with their experience and can see how they can use the theory in practice” (p.120).