Aim To provide a personal account of the factors in a doctoral study that led to the adoption of classic grounded theory principles relating to the use of literature.
Background Novice researchers considering grounded theory methodology will become aware of the contentious issue of how and when extant literature should be incorporated into a study. The three main grounded theory approaches are classic, Straussian and constructivist, and the seminal texts provide conflicting beliefs surrounding the use of literature. A classic approach avoids a pre-study literature review to minimise preconceptions and emphasises the constant comparison method, while the Straussian and constructivist approaches focus more on the beneficial aspects of an initial literature review and researcher reflexivity. The debate also extends into the wider academic community, where no consensus exists.
Review methods This is a methodological paper detailing the authors’ engagement in the debate surrounding the role of the literature in a grounded theory study.
Discussion In the authors’ experience, researchers can best understand the use of literature in grounded theory through immersion in the seminal texts, engaging with wider academic literature, and examining their preconceptions of the substantive area. The authors concluded that classic grounded theory principles were appropriate in the context of their doctoral study.
Conclusion Novice researchers will have their own sets of circumstances when preparing their studies and should become aware of the different perspectives to make decisions that they can ultimately justify.
Implications for research/practice This paper can be used by other novice researchers as an example of the decision-making process that led to delaying a pre-study literature review and identifies the resources used to write a research proposal when using a classic grounded theory approach.
