Theoretical sensitivity 72 

I have disclosed my worldview and my assumptions Chapter 2. I also bring knowledge about reflection and reflective practice from both theoretical and practical perspectives. As is apparent from Chapter 1, I have conducted a literature review on the topics of reflection and reflective practice in audiology. The literature review I conducted became a part of my theoretical sensitivity, and informed the conduct of this grounded theory study. In Chapter 4, when literature informed analysis, the associated literature is cited. I engaged in reflexivity to help ensure that my pre-existing knowledge and assumptions informed my work, were made as explicit as possible, yet did not dictate my findings (0). Notably, during coding and memo-writing stages, I avoided detailed review of new, relevant literature because I wanted to be able to openly code without seeing only what I was reading about at that time, knowing that I was already sensitized by my pre-existing knowledge (Bowen, 2006). However, other practice and teaching experiences and incidental exposure to relevant topics through

seminars and dialogue with colleagues and peers certainly may have influenced my theoretical lens and thus sensitivity.

constructing and writing up the theory

integrating diagramming sorting theoretical sampling

memoing

advanced

initial

coding

focused

initial

3.8.3

Reflexivity

I engaged in researcher reflexivity throughout the data collection and analysis portions of the constant comparative method. I was reflexive through journal writing and discussions with key critical companions (such as fellow doctoral candidates and professional colleagues), to acknowledge and uncover my pre- conceptions and examine how these pre-conceptions interacted with my data analyses. I also had a formal data analysis meeting per data collection time-point with my doctoral supervisors to ensure that I was seeking out external sources of feedback and additional input into data analysis. Relevant reflexive experiences that I believe may have particularly shaped my interpretive lens are discussed in detail in Chapter 5. Explicating my reflexive activities allows the reader to assess how my knowledge, assumptions, experiences, and worldview have influenced the study, analyses, and the developed theory (Charmaz, 2006).

3.8.4

Coding

Coding is the first step in analysis (though it is repeated throughout the iterative process); it refers to the categorizing of data into labelled segments, and begins the process of moving from concrete statements in data to analytic

interpretations (Charmaz, 2006). Codes begin the process of selecting, separating and sorting data into an analytic account. For a grounded theory, coding also begins the framework for studying action and processes, toward the development of a theory.

Initial coding remains very true to the data, trying to identify actions, points of view, and categories the data may suggest. Coding at this stage is fairly open- ended, but Charmaz (2006) emphasizes that the researcher’s prior ideas and skills influence what is coded. At this stage, initial coding can lead the researcher to discover gaps in the data; codes are provisional in that they may require

rewording to improve their fit to the data (Charmaz, 2006). Initial coding may take place word-by-word, line-by-line, or incident-by-incident, depending on the nature of the data (Charmaz, 2006). I planned to use a line-by-line approach, but the

data tended to suit an incident-by-incident approach. Throughout initial coding, a data to data comparison approach is used.

The next step of coding is focused coding. These codes are directed, selective and conceptual. Focused coding involves decisions about which initial codes make most analytic sense (Charmaz, 2006). Again, focused coding does not necessarily take place linearly; a return to initial coding may be called for. Throughout focused coding, comparisons across data sources are required. Theoretical coding specifies the relationships between categories developed during focused coding (Charmaz, 2006; Kelle, 2008). Theoretical coding is seen as more open and less forceful and limiting of the data than alternative coding approaches in other schools of grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006; Kelle, 2008). Rather than developing a strict frame or matrix, coding families or conceptual guides for coding are used to clarify and sharpen the analysis (Charmaz, 2006). Coding families serve as a conceptual bank from which researchers may develop their thinking about empirical observations in theoretical terms (Kelle, 2005, 2008). Theoretical sensitivity informs theoretical coding, and as such, my

theoretical coding was informed by the body of theory and literature reviewed in Chapter 1, the worldview and assumptions described in Chapter 2, and the experiences shared in Chapter 5.

3.8.5

Theoretical sampling

Theoretical sampling occurred after each set of written reflections was analyzed. Based on the contents of the written reflection pieces, I sampled interview

participants and data sources to expand on developing codes and concepts early on. As theoretical categories began to take shape, I theoretically sampled

participants and sources to confirm, clarify, expand, and even counter these categories and the relationships between them (Draucker, Martsolf,

Ratchneewan, & Rusk, 2007). The interview questions used in Time-point 2 and 3 were also influenced by theoretical sampling.

3.8.6

Theoretical sufficiency

The process of sampling participants for interviews ceased when data no longer seemed to provide information that contributed to the development of the

grounded theory. Theoretical saturation is considered by some grounded theorists as a misnomer; researchers may subjectively decide when they have reached theoretical sufficiency, but depending on the scope of the theory under development, researchers must be careful in stating that they have reached theoretical saturation (Charmaz, 2006; Dey, 1999). I kept this recommendation in mind when I made the decision to cease data collection and declare theoretical sufficiency. Also, given that this study was conducted as part of a doctoral program, and was structured to longitudinally follow a cohort across a pre- determined span of time, these practicalities imposed a strong influence on timelines for data collection. However, despite this practical limitation, I did find it possible to declare theoretical sufficiency across the developed theory, even prior to my final two interviews, which were scheduled prior to realizing

theoretical sufficiency. The final two interviews’ data were useful; however, they did not add new theoretical insights to the grounded theory. Rather, they did confirm and exemplify the developed categories and their relationships.

3.8.7

Memo-writing

Memos are informal analytic notes, which serve as an intermediate step between data collection and writing a paper and help explicate codes as conceptual

categories. According to Charmaz (2006), memos may include any of the following: comparisons between data and data, data and codes, codes and codes, codes and categories, categories and categories; raw data; empirical evidence to support definitions of a category and analytic claims; conjectures to check in the field; identified gaps; details about processes. Memos help

grounded theorists seek patterns in their data, which is a necessary component of theory development (Charmaz, 2006). I used memos as described by

the level of conceptual categories. These memos in turn formed the basis of the developed theory, once linked and organized as follows.