Literature DB >> 27163329

A discussion of differences in preparation, performance and postreflections in participant observations within two grounded theory approaches.

Connie Bøttcher Berthelsen1,2, Tove Lindhardt3, Kirsten Frederiksen2.   

Abstract

This paper presents a discussion of the differences in using participant observation as a data collection method by comparing the classic grounded theory methodology of Barney Glaser with the constructivist grounded theory methodology by Kathy Charmaz. Participant observations allow nursing researchers to experience activities and interactions directly in situ. However, using participant observations as a data collection method can be done in many ways, depending on the chosen grounded theory methodology, and may produce different results. This discussion shows that how the differences between using participant observations in classic and constructivist grounded theory can be considerable and that grounded theory researchers should adhere to the method descriptions of performing participant observations according to the selected grounded theory methodology to enhance the quality of research.
© 2016 Nordic College of Caring Science.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Charmaz; Glaser; classic; constructivist; data collection; grounded theory; method; methodology; participant observations

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27163329     DOI: 10.1111/scs.12353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Caring Sci        ISSN: 0283-9318


  2 in total

1.  Patient involvement in quality improvement - a 'tug of war' or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?

Authors:  Carolina Bergerum; Agneta Kullén Engström; Johan Thor; Maria Wolmesjö
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 2.655

2.  A grounded theory approach to understanding in-game goods purchase.

Authors:  Xiaowei Cai; Javier Cebollada; Mónica Cortiñas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.