Glaserian Grounded Theory

2020 ◽  
pp. 79-89
Author(s):  
Caroline Jane Porr ◽  
Phyllis Noerager Stern
Author(s):  
Kara S. Lopez ◽  
Susan P. Robbins

Despite the meteoric rise of social media, little is known about how clinical social workers and other mental health professionals respond to this new form of communication. This study used classic (Glaserian) grounded theory methodology to explore the experiences and concerns of mental health professionals on social networking websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. The main concern that emerged out of research interviews with 26 mental health professionals was a loss of control over others’ perceptions and the loss of ability to compartmentalize the different parts of identities associated with personal and professional selves. Participants resolved these concerns through the author-identified basic social process of “managing digital identities.” This study highlights practice implications for professionals as they manage online identity.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Patrea Rose Andersen

<p>Critical Comparative Nursing Assessment (CCNA) is a theory about how the competence of completing Bachelor of Nursing students in New Zealand is determined. Semi-structured, audio-taped interviews and field notes were used to collect data from twenty-seven nurses with experience in undertaking competency  assessment. A Glaserian grounded theory approach was used to guide the data collection and analysis. This utilised the processes of constant comparative analysis, theoretical sampling and saturation to generate a middle range substantive grounded theory. This is presented as a model consisting of four emergent categories that explain how nurses formulate professional judgements about competence. These are a) gathering, which describes the processes used to collect evidence of practice to inform decisions; b) weighing up, which explains how evidence is analysed using the processes of benchmarking and comparative analysis; c) judging brings into focus the tensions inherent in making professional judgements about competence and how nurses formulated these, and d) moderating, which describes the processes nurses use to validate decisions and ensure that professional responsibilities and public safety are upheld. The basic social psychological process of comparing integrates these categories to explain how nurses resolve the tensions associated with making decisions about competence. This research presents a new way of viewing and understanding how nurses assess competence. It identifies where the challengers and tensions related to the assessment of competence lie and suggests strategies that if implemented could further enhance the validity and reliability of assessment outcomes.</p>


Author(s):  
Lars-Johan Age

Glaserian grounded theory methodology, which has been widely adopted as a scientific methodology in recent decades, has been variously characterised as "hermeneutic" and "positivist." This commentary therefore takes a different approach to characterising grounded theory by undertaking a comprehensive analysis of: (a) the philosophical paradigms of positivism, hermeneutics, and pragmatism; and (b) the general philosophical questions of the aims of science and the issue of choosing a scientific methodology. The commentary then seeks to position grounded theory methodology in terms of these philosophical perspectives. The study concludes that grounded theory methodology contains elements of positivism, hermeneutics, and pragmatism. In coming to this conclusion, the study clarifies the degree to which these three perspectives are found within Glaserian grounded theory methodology.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Patrea Rose Andersen

<p>Critical Comparative Nursing Assessment (CCNA) is a theory about how the competence of completing Bachelor of Nursing students in New Zealand is determined. Semi-structured, audio-taped interviews and field notes were used to collect data from twenty-seven nurses with experience in undertaking competency  assessment. A Glaserian grounded theory approach was used to guide the data collection and analysis. This utilised the processes of constant comparative analysis, theoretical sampling and saturation to generate a middle range substantive grounded theory. This is presented as a model consisting of four emergent categories that explain how nurses formulate professional judgements about competence. These are a) gathering, which describes the processes used to collect evidence of practice to inform decisions; b) weighing up, which explains how evidence is analysed using the processes of benchmarking and comparative analysis; c) judging brings into focus the tensions inherent in making professional judgements about competence and how nurses formulated these, and d) moderating, which describes the processes nurses use to validate decisions and ensure that professional responsibilities and public safety are upheld. The basic social psychological process of comparing integrates these categories to explain how nurses resolve the tensions associated with making decisions about competence. This research presents a new way of viewing and understanding how nurses assess competence. It identifies where the challengers and tensions related to the assessment of competence lie and suggests strategies that if implemented could further enhance the validity and reliability of assessment outcomes.</p>


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Neill ◽  
Imelda Coyne

Felt or enacted criticism was identified as a significant influence on White British parents’ decision making during acute childhood illness in a substantive grounded theory “Containing acute childhood illness within family life.” These parents sought to avoid further criticism, sometimes leading to delayed consultation. Using Glaserian grounded theory principles, we conducted a secondary analysis of data from three studies, to establish the transferability and modifiability of the original theory to other settings and communities in Ireland and England. Felt or enacted criticism was found to operate across the childhood age range, social groups, and settings. Parent’s strategies to avoid criticism reduced contacts with health professionals, access to support and, more worryingly, communication about their child’s health. These findings demonstrate the wider applicability, or “work” in Glaser’s terms, of the concept in the English speaking Western world. Findings indicate the need for nurses to identify and mitigate sources of criticism.


Author(s):  
Leena Aarto-Pesonen ◽  
Päivi Tynjälä

This paper presents a Glaserian grounded theory study of adult students’ holistic professional growth in a two-year tailored, work-related, teacher qualification program in physical education. The data consisted of reflective learning diaries, interviews and the written texts of 20 adult students. The data analysis followed the stages of Glaserian grounded theory analysis with substantive and theoretical coding processes carried out using the constant comparative method. The article presents the emotional core and its properties (criticality, ethicality and empowerment) of physical education teacher students’ professional growth. In addition, the article introduces a substantive theory of a process of adult students’ multifaceted professional growth during a work-related physical education teacher-qualification program and discusses the pedagogical implications in relation to developing teacher education in general and the education of physical education teachers in particular.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yakubu Ismaila ◽  
Sara Bayes ◽  
Sadie Geraghty

Abstract Despite global efforts to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality rates, the problem continues to persist, especially in Lower- and Middle-Income Countries like Ghana. For years it has been acknowledged that the deployment of well-trained and regulated midwives could provide a cost-efficient way of reducing maternal and neonatal mortality. However, multiple factors including; recently increasing demands made by birthing women, the growing complexity of midwifery work and a shortage of midwives as well as other barriers have affected the ability of midwives to provide quality maternal and neonatal care. This study aims to provide insight into some of the consequences of these barriers that midwives face in their workplaces.MethodsGlaserian Grounded Theory was applied in this study. Semi structured interviews were conducted with twenty-nine (29) midwives and four (4) other workers whose roles impacts on the work of midwives. In accordance with the requirements of grounded theory, data collection and analysis occurred concurrently while building on the data that has already been analyzed. Constant comparison was used throughout the data analysis.ResultsThe analysis of the data indicated that barriers to midwives’ ability to provide quality care have physiological, psychological and socioeconomic consequences on midwives thereby affecting the quality of the care that they offer to women and newborns. ConclusionThe effects of the barriers to midwives’ abilities to provide quality care are intertwined and have consequences on both the midwives as well as on the quality of the care that they provide to patients. By implementing measures to ameliorate or mitigate the effects of the barriers that midwives face in their work, the quality of the care that they provide to women and neonates will be enhanced, which in turn will positively affect the retention of midwives and maximize the benefits of implementing the midwifery model of care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document