Understanding Bias and Preconception in Classic Grounded Theory
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
A commonly accepted truth in qualitative and quantitative research is that bias is a bad thing. Such a statement would be accurate. However, in classic grounded theory, bias is not a concern—a very different perspective. A discussion about what bias is and why it is not an issue will be discussed, along with an explanation of the constant comparative method. On the other hand, and additionally, the term preconception is explained with a more nuanced discussion about why that researcher-derived externality is not allowed in classic grounded theory.
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
Chametzky, B. (2022). How Barney Glaser and classic grounded theory have changed and impacted my life. Grounded Theory Review, 21(1), 44-46.
Chametzky, B. (2024). I’m developing a theory but I have no idea what it is: Confusion in classic grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 23(2), 30–42.
Chametzky, B. (2025). Doing classic grounded theory with quantitative data. Grounded Theory Review, 25(1), 108–116.
Darling, H. S. (2024). Statistical errors in scientific research: A narrative review. Cancer Research, Statistics and Treatment, 7(2), 241–249. https://doi.org/10.4103/crst.crst_283_23
Deady, R. (2011). Reading with methodological perspective bias: A journey into classic grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review 10(1), 41–57.
Devine, S. A., Lee, M., Gurnani, A. S., Sunderaraman, P., Kourtis, L., Pratap, A., Low, S., Ho, K., Gifford, K. A., & Au, R. (2024). Alzheimer’s & Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association, 20(S2), 1–2). https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.091267
Ehmke, S. D., Ehmke, E. T., & Chauhan, P. (2025). Uncovering unconscious bias in first-year nursing students: A qualitative study on student perceptions, empathy, and growth. Nurse Educator, 50(5), E293–E297.
Elliott, N., & Lazenbatt, A. (2005). How to recognize a ‘quality’ grounded theory research study. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22(3), 48–52. https://doi.org/10.37464/2005.223.1975
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Transaction.
Glaser, B. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436-445. http://ucpressjournals.com/journal.php?j=sp
Glaser, B. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2001). The grounded theory perspective: Conceptualization contrasted with description. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2002). Constructivist grounded theory? Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 3(3), Art. 12.
Glaser, B. G. with the assistance of Judith Holton. (2005). Basic social processes. Grounded Theory Review, 4(3), 1–26.
Glaser, B. (2007). All is data. Grounded Theory Review, 6(2), 1–23.
Glaser, B. (2008). Doing quantitative grounded theory. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2012a). Stop, write: Writing grounded theory. Sociology Press.
Glaser. B. (2012b). Constructivist grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 11(1) 28–38.
Glaser, B. (2014). Memoing: A vital grounded theory perspective. Sociology Press.
Jones, L., Barnett, A., & Vagenas, D. (2025). Common misconceptions held by health researchers when interpreting linear regression assumptions, a cross-sectional study. PLoS On 20(6). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0299617
Merriam-Webster. (2025). preconceive. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved December 27, 2025, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/preconceive
Mrabti, L., & Alaoui, Z. B. (2025). Between qualitative and quantitative: What methodological choices for contemporary sociology? Moroccan Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 7(2), 1–7. https://revues.imist.ma/index.php/MJQR/article/view/53694/28345
Mrara, B., Oladimeji, O., Rantloane, A. J., & Burch, V. C. (2025). Reducing unconscious bias in postgraduate specialist assessment in South Africa. African Journal of Health Professions Education, 17(1), 28–30. https://research.ebsco.com/c/36ffkw/viewer/pdf/v6nagijnpz
Principe, L. (2022). 8 Ways to rule out bias in qualitative research. https://www.civicommrs.com/8-ways-to-rule-out-bias-in-qualitative-research/
QDAcity. (n.d.). What types of bias exist in qualitative research? A brief introduction to bias in qualitative research. https://qdacity.com/bias-in-qualitative-research/
Smith, J., & Noble, H. (2025). Understanding sources of bias in research. Evidence-based Nursing, 28, 137–139. https://ebn.bmj.com/content/28/3/137.full#ref-1