Reflecting on the challenges of choosing and using a grounded theory approach
Methodological decision making Previous     Next

Reflecting on the challenges of choosing and using a grounded theory approach

Kathleen Markey Lecturer, Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Limerick, Ireland
Mary Tilki Former principal lecturer, Middlesex University, London, UK
Georgina Taylor Honorary researcher, School of Health and Education, Middlesex University, London, UK

Aim To explore three different approaches to grounded theory and consider some of the possible philosophical assumptions underpinning them.

Background Grounded theory is a comprehensive yet complex methodology that offers a procedural structure that guides the researcher. However, divergent approaches to grounded theory present dilemmas for novice researchers seeking to choose a suitable research method.

Review methods This is a methodology paper.

Data sources This is a reflexive paper that explores some of the challenges experienced by a PhD student when choosing and operationalising a grounded theory approach.

Discussion Before embarking on a study, novice grounded theory researchers should examine their research beliefs to assist them in selecting the most suitable approach. This requires an insight into the approaches’ philosophical assumptions, such as those pertaining to ontology and epistemology. Researchers need to be clear about the philosophical assumptions underpinning their studies and the effects that different approaches will have on the research results.

Conclusion This paper presents a personal account of the journey of a novice grounded theory researcher who chose a grounded theory approach and worked within its theoretical parameters.

Implications for research/practice Novice grounded theory researchers need to understand the different philosophical assumptions that influence the various grounded theory approaches, before choosing one particular approach.

Nurse Researcher. 22, 2, 16-22. doi: 10.7748/nr.22.2.16.e1272

Peer review

This article has been subject to double blind peer review

Conflict of interest

None declared

Received: 06 August 2013

Accepted: 05 December 2013

Want to read more?

Already subscribed? Log in

OR

Unlock full access to RCNi Plus today

Save over 50% on your first 3 months

Your subscription package includes:
  • Unlimited online access to all 10 RCNi Journals and their archives
  • Customisable dashboard featuring 200+ topics
  • RCNi Learning featuring 180+ RCN accredited learning modules
  • RCNi Portfolio to build evidence for revalidation
  • Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests
Subscribe
RCN student member? Try Nursing Standard Student

Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now

Or