扎根理论的最佳秘密:构建理论的能力

C. Urquhart
{"title":"扎根理论的最佳秘密:构建理论的能力","authors":"C. Urquhart","doi":"10.4135/9781526485656.n6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While the power and influence of GTM as a qualitative research method in all academic disciplines continues to evolve and grow, the original intent of the founding fathers to build theory, and build it ambitiously, across and over different data sets and settings, seems to be rarely discussed in the literature. In particular, the recommendations from Glaser and Strauss in their 1967 Discovery book about building formal theory from substantive theory are rarely referenced. This chapter discusses how best to consider the recommendations from Glaser and Strauss with regard to not only building theory by minimising and maximising group differences, but by also considering the diversity or similarity of concepts within similar or dissimilar groups. An example of how such movements from substantive to formal theory might proceed is discussed, in order to explore and demonstrate those ideas in depth. The grounded theory approach to theory building is contrasted and critiqued against more mainstream ideas about theory building in various disciplines, and the debates about theory that exist in many applied disciplines. Finally, this chapter discusses how grounded theorists can actively take up these ideas within their own academic disciplines.","PeriodicalId":176207,"journal":{"name":"The SAGE Handbook of Current Developments in Grounded Theory","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Grounded Theory's Best Kept Secret: The Ability\\n to Build Theory\",\"authors\":\"C. Urquhart\",\"doi\":\"10.4135/9781526485656.n6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While the power and influence of GTM as a qualitative research method in all academic disciplines continues to evolve and grow, the original intent of the founding fathers to build theory, and build it ambitiously, across and over different data sets and settings, seems to be rarely discussed in the literature. In particular, the recommendations from Glaser and Strauss in their 1967 Discovery book about building formal theory from substantive theory are rarely referenced. This chapter discusses how best to consider the recommendations from Glaser and Strauss with regard to not only building theory by minimising and maximising group differences, but by also considering the diversity or similarity of concepts within similar or dissimilar groups. An example of how such movements from substantive to formal theory might proceed is discussed, in order to explore and demonstrate those ideas in depth. The grounded theory approach to theory building is contrasted and critiqued against more mainstream ideas about theory building in various disciplines, and the debates about theory that exist in many applied disciplines. Finally, this chapter discusses how grounded theorists can actively take up these ideas within their own academic disciplines.\",\"PeriodicalId\":176207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The SAGE Handbook of Current Developments in Grounded Theory\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The SAGE Handbook of Current Developments in Grounded Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526485656.n6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The SAGE Handbook of Current Developments in Grounded Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526485656.n6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

虽然GTM作为一种定性研究方法在所有学科中的力量和影响都在不断发展和增长,但其创始人建立理论的初衷,以及在不同数据集和设置上建立理论的雄心壮志,似乎很少在文献中被讨论。特别是格拉泽和施特劳斯在1967年出版的《发现》一书中关于从实体理论建立形式理论的建议很少被引用。本章讨论了如何最好地考虑格拉泽和施特劳斯的建议,不仅要通过最小化和最大化群体差异来构建理论,还要考虑相似或不同群体中概念的多样性或相似性。为了深入探索和论证这些思想,本文将讨论从实体理论到形式理论如何进行这种运动的一个例子。扎根理论的理论构建方法与各学科中关于理论构建的主流观点以及许多应用学科中存在的关于理论的争论进行了对比和批判。最后,本章讨论了扎根的理论家如何在他们自己的学科中积极地接受这些思想。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Grounded Theory's Best Kept Secret: The Ability to Build Theory
While the power and influence of GTM as a qualitative research method in all academic disciplines continues to evolve and grow, the original intent of the founding fathers to build theory, and build it ambitiously, across and over different data sets and settings, seems to be rarely discussed in the literature. In particular, the recommendations from Glaser and Strauss in their 1967 Discovery book about building formal theory from substantive theory are rarely referenced. This chapter discusses how best to consider the recommendations from Glaser and Strauss with regard to not only building theory by minimising and maximising group differences, but by also considering the diversity or similarity of concepts within similar or dissimilar groups. An example of how such movements from substantive to formal theory might proceed is discussed, in order to explore and demonstrate those ideas in depth. The grounded theory approach to theory building is contrasted and critiqued against more mainstream ideas about theory building in various disciplines, and the debates about theory that exist in many applied disciplines. Finally, this chapter discusses how grounded theorists can actively take up these ideas within their own academic disciplines.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信