Glaserian Classic Grounded Theory and Descriptive Phenomenology Similarities and Differences
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Though one may presume that all qualitative designs are similar—and to a certain degree, they are, there are some similarities and differences in two designs—phenomenology and Glaserian classic grounded theory—which need to be explored in a more nuanced manner. By explaining these connections and divergences, less-experienced researchers will not only gain a greater understanding of the designs, but also will be able to make more informed decisions about them. Though the use of description to talk about the given experience is not encouraged in Glaserian classic grounded theory, on some level initially it is present, whereas in phenomenology description of the experience is foundational and inextricably linked to the design. In both designs, a researcher needs to set aside judgments, theories, and previous ideas to see the data as purely as possible. Once greater focus is achieved, there are different ways, according to the design, that the researcher will assemble the data into a coherent explanation of the experience. In this paper, several connections and points of difference will be presented.
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. K., Mohammed, R. A., & Nashwan, A. J., Ibrahim, R. H., Abdalla, A. Q., Ameen, B. M. M., & Khdhir, B. M. (2025). Using thematic analysis in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2025.100198
Aziz, A., & Khan, N. (2021). The exploration of stigma and discrimination among patients suffering from depression: A phenomenological study. NUST Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 7(2), 206–230. https://doi.org/10.51732/njssh.v7i2.90
Barbero, C., & Amaro, R. (2024). Are we talking about the same thing? Modeling semantic similarity between common and specialized lexica in WordNet. Languages, 9(3), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9030089
Bytantas, M. (2025). What is reduction in phenomenology, really? An attempt to get to the essence of the phenomenon. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251360315
Chametzky, B. (2015). Surviving situational suffering: A classic grounded theory study of post-secondary contingent faculty members in the United States. Grounded Theory Review, 14(1), 26–40.
Chametzky, B. (2020). Becoming an expert: A classic grounded theory study of doctoral learners. Grounded Theory Review, 19(2), 20–35.
Chametzky, B. (2022a). Coding in classic grounded theory: I’ve done an interview; Now what? Grounded Theory Journal, 21(2), 22-32. Reprinted from Sociology Mind, 6(4), 163–172.
Chametzky, B. (2022b). Discovering and uncovering: A new perspective on dissociative identity disorder. Grounded Theory Review, 21(1), 71–84.
Chametzky, B. (2023). Writing memos: A vital classic grounded theory task. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (EJ-Social), 3(1), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejsocial.2023.3.1.377
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.
Claridge, T. (2020). Shared language and codes: An aspect of the cognitive dimension of social capital. Institute for Social Capital. https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Shared-language-and-codes.pdf
Dahal, N. (2025). Qualitative data analysis: Reflections, procedures, and some points for consideration. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2025.1669578
Gilicka, M., & Mickiewica, A. (2025). Leopold Blaustein vs. Edmund Husserl. Phainomena, 34(134-135), 187-213. https://doi.org/ 10.32022/PHI34.2025.134-135.8
Giorgi, A. (2012). The descriptive phenomenological psycho logical method. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 43(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1163/156916212X632934
Giorgi, A. (2021). The necessity of the epochē and reduction for a Husserlian phenomenological science of psychology. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 52(1),1–35. https://doi.org/10.1163/15691624-12341382
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. AldineTransaction.
Glaser, B. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Society for the Study of Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445.
Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Sociology Press.
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). Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory. International Institute for Qualitative Methodology, 1(2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1.1.120.9345
Glaser, B. (2005). The grounded theory perspective III: Theoretical coding. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. (2007). All is data. The Grounded Theory Review, 6(2), 1-22.
Glaser, B. (2009). Jargonizing: Using the grounded theory vocabulary. 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. (2013). Introduction: Free style memoing. Grounded Theory Review, 12(2), 2–14.
Glaser, B. (2014). Memoing: A vital grounded theory procedure. Sociology Press.
Grajzel, K. (2025). Meditation in qualitative research for bracketing and beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241312826
Hossain, M. S., Alam, M. K., & Ali, M. S. (2024). Phenomenological approach in qualitative study: Data collection and saturation. ICRRD Journal, 5(2), 147–172. https://icrrd.com/public/media/09062024071340-Phenomenological-Approach.pdf
John, I., Forgie, S., Babenko, O., & Rashid, M. (2025). Conducting phenomenological research in medical education. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251396
Larsson, S., & Myrendal, J. (2024). Not just semantics: Word meaning negotiation in social media and spoken interaction. Proceedings of the 2024 CLASP Conference. https://aclanthology.org/2024.clasp-1.8.pdf
Madden, K. (2025). Does using hermeneutic phenomenology truly aid in understanding a phenomenon? Whitireia Journal of Nursing, Health & Social Services, 32, 49–55. https://doi.org/10.34074/whit.3204
Matta, C. (2022). Philosophical paradigms in qualitative research methods education: What is their pedagogical role? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(6), 1049–1062. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.1958372
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Description. In Merrian-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January, 13, 2026, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/description
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage.
Norman, L. (2025). Reconsidering mechanisms in social science research: The varied uses of an explanatory metaphor. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 59(2), 1695–1712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-02040-3
Oluka, A. (2025). Phenomenological research strategy: Descriptive and interpretive approaches. F1000Research 2025, 14, 725. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.166273.1
OpenAI. (2026). ChatGPT (Jan 12 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
Osman, A., Kyeraa, A., & Opoku, V. (2024). The efficacy of performance appraisal system in educational institutions: Insights from the Jaman North District of Ghana. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies and Innovative Research, 12(4), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.53075/Ijmsirq/09873656546754
Parastou, Y., Zarani, F., Boelen, P. A., Zabihzadeh, A., Panaghi, L., & Ghorkhanehchi, R. (2025). Experiences of Iranian people who lost a partner in road traffic collisions: A descriptive phenomenology. Death Studies, 49(10), 1389–1402. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2024.2400370
Schmitt, R. (1967). Husserl’s transcendental-phenomenological reduction. In J. J. Kockelans (Ed.), Phenomenology (pp. 58-68). Doubleday.
Simmons, O. (2022). Experiencing grounded theory: A comprehensive guide to learning, doing, mentoring, teaching, and applying grounded theory. BrownWalker Press.
Spradley, J. (2016). The ethnographic interview. Waveland Press, Inc.
Thomas, S. P., & Sohn, B. K. (2023). From uncomfortable squirm to self-discovery: A phenomenological analysis of the bracketing experience. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231191635
Vold Hansen, T. (2022). The role of the literature and theory in defining and bounding a case. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221142998
Walezak, E. (2025). What is it like? The art of description in contemporary realisms. Études britanniques contemporaines. http://doi.org/10.4000/158kd
Weaver, R. M. (1919). What is description. The English Journal, 8(2), 63–80
White, D. R., & White, T. A., & Vander Linden, K. L. (2025). Emerging from grief: The theory of care realignment. Grounded Theory Review, 25(1), 117–146.
Yalçın, V., Özdemir, A., & Gönül, M. B. (2024). Teacher experiences in Turkiye in the mathematics Olympiad process: A phenomenology study. International Education Studies, 18(4), 138–150. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v18n4p138
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. (4th ed.). Sage.