A Methodology-Specific Rubric for Glaserian Classic Grounded Theory Supporting Fidelity, Rigor, and Constructive Peer Review

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Dec 23, 2025
Keywords:
Glaserian classic grounded theory, peer review, standardized reporting guidelines, remodeling, quality, rigor

Main Article Content

Kara L. Vander Linden
Institute for Research and Theory Methodologies
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3699-708X

Abstract

Many academic journals are adopting standardized reporting guidelines for qualitative research to assess the quality and rigor of the qualitative research being peer-reviewed. Applying generic reporting criteria to Glaserian classic grounded theory studies often leads to misunderstandings or pressures to conform to practices that violate the methodology, contributing to its remodeling. Existing rubrics should include methodological sections that are specific to the research methods and methodologies being used in the research. This article presents and explains such a rubric for Glaserian classic grounded theory. The rubric contains 25 items categorized into 7 categories: (1) methodological clarity, (2) role of the researcher, (3) literature review, (4) problem, purpose, and research question, (5) data collection & theoretical sampling, (6) data analysis, and (7) theory write-up.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Vander Linden, K. L. (2025). A Methodology-Specific Rubric for Glaserian Classic Grounded Theory: Supporting Fidelity, Rigor, and Constructive Peer Review. Grounded Theory Review, 25(1), 31–51. Retrieved from https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/478
Issue
Vol. 25 No. 1 (2025)
Section
Articles

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.

Author Biography

Kara L. Vander Linden, Institute for Research and Theory Methodologies

Dr. Kara Vander Linden is an interdisciplinary researcher, educator, and mentor. She is the founder and executive director of the Institute for Research and Theory Methodologies and the Director of the Glaser Center for Grounded Theory. Dr. Vander Linden teaches research and supervises dissertations at Saybrook University. She is a peer reviewer for several journals. 

Dr. Vander Linden earned a doctorate in education from Fielding Graduate University (Santa Barbara, CA) with specializations in grounded theory, grounded action, and higher education leadership. She earned a master's in special education from the University of North Carolina (Charlotte, NC) and a Bachelor of Arts in mathematics from Queens University (Charlotte, NC). She has specialized training in working with learners with dyslexia.  

Areas of interest are qualitative research methods and grounded theory, higher education, adult learning, math education, special education, dyslexia, homeschooling, curriculum development, online education, mentoring, organizational systems, and leadership.  

Contact information: kvanderlinden@mentoringresearchers.org

References

Connor, J., Flenady, T., Massey, D., & Dwyer, T. (2024). Classic grounded theory: Identifying the main concern. Research in Nursing & Health, 47(3), 277–288.

Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436-445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (1992). The basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing. Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Sociology Press.

Glaser, B. G., & Holton, J. (2004). Remodeling grounded theory. Qualitative Social Research Forum, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-5.2.607

Glaser, B. G. (2011). Generating formal theory. In V. B. Martin & A. Gynnild (Eds.), Grounded theory: The philosophy, method, and works of Barney Glaser (pp. 257-276). BrownWalker.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Sociology Press.

Guba E.G. and Lincoln Y.S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Sage.

Holton, J. A., & Walsh, I. (2017). Classic grounded theory: Applications with qualitative and quantitative data. SAGE Publishing.

Lincoln Y.S. & Guba E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

Nathaniel, A. (2008). Eliciting spill: A methodological note. Grounded Theory Review, 7(01), 61–66. Retrieved from https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/368

Nathaniel, A. K. (2022). When and how to use extant literature in classic grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 21(02), 33–48. Retrieved from https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/417

O'Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Academic medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 89(9), 1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388

Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International journal for quality in health care, 19(6), 349-357.

Simmons, O. E. (2010). Is that a real theory or did you just make it up? Teaching classic grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 9(2), 15-38. https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/70

Simmons, O. E. (2022). Experiencing grounded theory: A comprehensive guide to learning, doing, mentoring, teaching, and applying grounded theory. Brown Walker Press.

Vander Linden, K. L., & Palmieri, P. A. (2021). Criteria for assessing a classic grounded theory study: A brief methodological review with minimum reporting recommendations. Grounded Theory Review, 20(02), 107–115. Retrieved from https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/434