The Importance of Epistemology When Defending a Doctoral Thesis The Research Philosophical Nature of Classic Grounded Theory
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article sets out a conceptual discussion based on a lively epistemological debate that took place during a doctoral viva voce examination for a classic grounded theory (GT) study (an exploration of police behaviour during domestic abuse incidents). The discussion uncovered conflicts regarding how methodology is viewed from different research traditions, and the potential impact of this problem on how research (like classic GT) is received and understood by scholars from different research philosophical perspectives, such as positivism. It also revealed how challenging it is, for a novice researcher, to adequately convince others of the rigorous nature of classic GT without reference and comparison to the research philosophical ideas that underpin other research traditions, more broadly. I claim that research philosophy must be addressed more fully by classic GT scholars if they are to encourage the uptake of classic GT by more doctoral candidates.
Downloads
Article Details
The Grounded Theory Review is an open-access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the international Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.
References
Ahmed, S. and Haag, M. (2016). Entering the field: Decisions of an early career researcher adopting classic grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 15(2). http://groundedtheoryreview.com
Ash, D. P. (2021). Balancing value and effort: A classic grounded theory of frontline police practice. (Doctoral dissertation, Keele University). https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/9299/
Bhaskar, R. (1979). The possibility of naturalism. Humanities Press.
Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond objectivism: Science, hermeneutics and praxis. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Bryant, A. & Charmaz, K. (2007). The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Sage.
Crewe, D. (2013). Becoming criminal: The socio-cultural origins of law, transgression, and deviance. Springer.
DiCristina, B. (1995). Method in criminology: A philosophical primer. Harrow and Heston.
Glaser, B. G. (2015). Choosing grounded theory: A GT reader of expert advice. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2005). The grounded theory perspective III: Theoretical coding. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2003). The grounded theory perspective II: Description s remodeling of grounded theory methodology. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Sociology Press.
Holton, J. A. & Walsh, I. (2016). Classic grounded theory: Applications with qualitative and quantitative data. SAGE.
Johnston, L., & Shearing, C. (2009). From a ‘dialogue of the deaf’ to a ‘dialogue of listening’: Towards a new methodology of policing research and practice. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 10(5-6), 415-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614260903378368
Kendall, J. (1999). Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 21(6), pp. 743–757. https://doi.org/10.1177/019394599902100603
Lowe, A. (2017). Intellectual autonomy of PhD researchers who use the grounded theory methodology. Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal, 16(1). http://groundedtheoryreview.com
Lumsden, K., & Goode, J. (2018). Policing research and the rise of the ‘evidence-base’: Police officer and staff understandings of research, its implementation and ‘what works’. Sociology, 52(4), 813-829. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038516664684
Mingers, J. (2004). Re-establishing the real: Critical realism and information systems. In Will-cocks, L. P., & Mingers, J. (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for information systems. John Wiley & Sons.
Nathaniel, A.K. (2011). An integrated philosophical framework that fits grounded theory. In Martin, V.B. and Gynnild, A. (Eds.), Grounded theory: The philosophy, method, and work of Barney Glaser. Brownwater Press, pp. 187-200.
O'Connor, A., Carpenter, B. & Coughlan, B. (2018). An exploration of key issues in the debate between classic and constructivist grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 17(1). http://groundedtheoryreview.com
Popper, K. R. (1968). The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge.
Sayer, A. (1984). Defining the urban. GeoJournal, 9(3), 279-284. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41143389
Tavory, I., & Timmermans, S. (2014). Abductive analysis: Theorizing qualitative research. University of Chicago Press.