Enhancing groundedness in realist grounded theory research.

Abstract

Although some scholars regard reinterpretations of grounded theory method (GTM) as erosion of its originality, this article argues that the evolutionary process has contributed to possibilities of theory making in social sciences in correspondence to a postmodern pluralistic point of view. By chronicling the development of GTM and drawing connections between realist grounded theory (RGT) and other strands of GTM, this article provides historical situatedness for RGT in the GTM family. This article also compares the major philosophical schools and their influences in the GTM development in juxtaposition. Moreover, a validation model is proposed to assist better understanding and usability of RGT, as this approach needed further clarification in both its philosophical foundation and evaluative criteria. The RGT validation model suggests that the degree of validity of an RGT account is contingent on the closeness between a theoretical account and social reality, which is rudimentarily suggested by the “groundedness” of a study (concurrent procedural validity) and subsequently reinforced by external testing studies and/or practices (incremental procedural validity). In addition, the validation model was tested in an empirical study. Examples were elicited to demonstrate the usability of the proposed model and its evaluative criteria.

Foodways, community, and film-making: a case study of funds of knowledge in higher education

“…This included a selection and reduction of data that focused primarily on the participants' utterances (interview transcripts), with the other data sources providing the context for interpreting the utterances. Employing FoK as the theoretical lens (González et al, 2005), we read the data iteratively through a constant comparative technique (Lo, 2014;Miles & Huberman, 1994), where we searched for recurring regularities in words, phrases, meanings, relationships and patterns. The process helped us to identify the codes (e.g., family, identity, and community), which were then used to mark, select, and eventually collate excerpts that led to the construction of themes.…”

Redundant deliberation about negative consequences: Decision inertia in emergency responders.

“…Both 'grounded theory' and 'thematic' analyses are similar techniques that combine inductive and deductive processes. The main difference is that grounded theory seeks to generate a theoretical model from the data that can be generalised to wider psychological phenomena (Glaser & Strauss, 1965;Lo, 2014), whereas thematic analyses seek to provide a rich and detailed description of the data set that is being studied (Braun & Clarke, 2006).…”

Bridging the divide in work and organizational psychology: evidence from practice

“…This approach facilitated in-depth questioning around particular instances of actual evidence-use, rather than general accounts of the extent of evidence use by practitioners which may be more subject to acquiescence, social desirability effects and other self-report biases. In addition to the care taken to avoid leading interviewees, this provided an additional means of assuring "concurrent procedural validity" (Lo, 2014).…”