Michael Muller, profile picture
Uploaded byMichael Muller
PDF, PPTX12,980 views

Grounded Theory Method - Muller

The document provides an overview of grounded theory methods, noting the diversity of approaches that have developed since its introduction and highlighting key components of the methodology such as simultaneous data collection and analysis, coding practices, and grounding emerging theories in qualitative data to develop conceptual categories.

Technology◦Education◦
Related topics:
Grounded Theory•

Embed presentation

Download as PDF, PPTX
Grounded Theory Methods Michael Muller IBM Research Cambridge, MA, USA michael_muller@us.ibm.com Thanks to: Sandra Kogan, Jennifer Thom-Santelli, David R Millen, Jane Preston Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 1
Outline • An orientation toward Grounded Theory Method • Diversity, diversity, diversity… – From Glaser & Strauss Glaser vs. Strauss – “The second generation” of grounded theorists • One view of methods and practices • Quality and rigor • Conclusion • Major sources • Software packages Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 2
Why Grounded Theory? • 63% of citations to qualitative analysis in Social Science Citation Index • Increasing references to Grounded Theory in ACM Digital Library • Useful for qualitative and quantitative data 140 • Combination of open mind with rigor and quality 120 Number of Papers returned by Search • However, not well-understood in HCI and CSCW 100 – Qualitative analysis vs. theory-building 80 – Use of quantitative data as well as qualitative 60 – Diversity in methodology 40 – Does grounded theory offer … methodology? theory? heuristics? 20 procedures? 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 3
Why Grounded Theory? • 63% of citations to qualitative analysis in Social Science Citation Index • Increasing references to Grounded Theory in ACM Digital Library • Method for exploring a domain without a dominant theory • Useful for qualitative and quantitative data • Combination of open mind with rigor and quality • However, not well-understood in HCI and CSCW – Qualitative analysis vs. theory-building – Use of quantitative data as well as qualitative – Diversity in methodology – Does grounded theory offer … methodology? theory? heuristics? procedures? Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 4
Answer Questions such as… • How do decisions happen in this organizational culture? – Interview decision-makers and contributors – Choose among many possible interviewees – Describe a contextualized theory of decision-making • What are the value systems of a group of companies? – Examine public documents in detail – Choose among a huge library of documents – Understand values and value trade-offs in context • What kinds of online communities? – Analyze members, shared “goods,” social networks – in sum, and over community lifecycle – Choose among thousands of communities – Derive a typography of online communities – Develop a lifecycle model for each type of community Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 5
A Way We Often (want to) Think • We want to think early about interpretation and theory • Grounded theory methodology offers a disciplined way to do this • Why pretend that we don’t interpret and theorize? – Why not turn our own tendencies to advantage! Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 6
A Way We Often (want to) Think • We want to think early about interpretation and theory • Grounded theory methodology offers a disciplined way to do this • Why pretend that we don’t interpret and theorize? – Why not turn our own tendencies to advantage! Charmaz: “Grounded theory methods consist of simultaneous data collection and analysis, with each informing and focusing the other throughout the research process. As grounded theorists, we begin our analysis early to help us focus further data collection. In turn, we use these focused data to refine our emerging analyses. Grounded theory entails developing increasingly abstract ideas about research participants’ meanings, actions, and worlds and seeking specific data to fill out, refine, and check the emerging conceptual categories...” Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 7
The Right Approach for Some Problems • What grounded theory is good for… – Exploration – Disciplined development of new ideas – Finding theory and structure in domains where there is no a priori guidance – Keeping an open mind as you explore a new domain • “An open mind is not in an empty head” – Working with qualitative or quantitative data • And what grounded theory is not good for… – Hypothesis testing – Evaluating a formal (e.g., published) theory – Confirming a hunch Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 8
For Example: Study of Online Communities (with Kate Ehrlich, Tara Matthews, Inbal Ronen, Ido Guy, Elizabeth Daly, David Millen…) • 8600+ online enterprise communities • One software environment, but hints of many variations • Read some communities, join some communities • Are they all Communities of Practice? initial “throw-away” theory – Test by looking for exceptions strategy of abduction – There are big virtual teams disconfirm initial theory – … tech communities, Rec communities – Idea Labs – very high participation rates theoretical sampling for breadth • Examine goal statements, patterns of membership, patterns of participation, begin to look for systematic differences claims of impact – Examine reputation, SNA… use concepts from research literature • Theory of enterprise online communities iteratively develop stronger theory – Focusing on theories of user appropriation more concepts from research literature • Leading to strong quantitative comparisons generate hypotheses for non-GT tests of CoP, Team, Tech, Rec, Idea Labs Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 9
Summary of the Example: Online Communities • Theory – Social media are “blank” until used • Carroll: “Completing design through use” – Users appropriate social media to create specific genres for specific organizational purposes – Users can navigate easily from one genre to another – Revisions of social construction of technology theory, adaptive structuration theory, social learning theory • Application – Matthews et al.: Collaboration personas – Erhlich et al.: Users who contribute more than expected – []: Metrics and analytics for the “health” of Communities of Practice, Teams, Technical Communities, Recreational Communities, Idea Labs
Strengths and Weaknesses of GT • Strengths – Outcomes are grounded in the data – Theory is continually tested through constant comparison – Data-collection is guided by theoretical sampling – Highlights the agency and responsibility of the researcher(s) • Weaknesses – Too many diverse approaches • How to choose? • How to evaluate? – Tension between “cookbooks” and “emergence” – Stopping rules are unclear – Highlights the agency and responsibility of the researcher(s) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 11
A Summary View of Grounded Theory Formal Theory ry ive Theo Sub stant Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 12
A Summary View of Grounded Theory Charmaz: “Grounded theory methods consist of simultaneous data collection and analysis, with each informing and focusing the other throughout the research process. As grounded theorists, we begin our Formal Theory analysis early to help us focus further data collection. In turn, we use these focused data to refine our emerging analyses. Grounded theory entails developing increasingly abstract ideas about research ry participants’ meanings, actions, and worlds and seeking specific data to e Theo antiv fill out, refine, and check the emerging conceptual categories...” t Subs Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 13
Diversity in Grounded Theory Method (GTM) “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 14
Diversity in Grounded Theory Method (GTM) “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Starr: “a manifesto for freedom from the sterile methods that permeated social sciences atStrauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 the time.” Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 15
Straussian Grounded Theory Method “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 16
Glaserian Grounded Theory Method “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 17
Method in Grounded Theory Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Straussian Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 18
Grounding the Theory in the Data Formal Theory ry ive Theo Sub stant Core Concept Dimensions Concepts / Categories Codes Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 19
Data Components & Analytic Practices • Core concept – The (emergent) topic • Selective coding “Emergence” (constructing) – Concepts/Dimensions • Axial coding Parameterizing – Categories • Open coding Aggregating – Basic themes • Data Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 20
Data Components & Analytic Practices • Core concept Starr: “A code sets up a relationship – The (emergent) topic with your data, and with your respondents…. a matter of both • Selective coding “Emergence” (constructing) attachment and separation…. Codes allow us to know about the field we – Concepts/Dimensions study, and yet carry the abstraction • Axial coding of the new.” Parameterizing – Categories • Open coding Aggregating – Basic themes • Data Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 21
Examples of Coding Informant Statement Open code From my perspective • Personal view the main challenge is • Assertion in changes in technology • Changes in technology or the product improvement • Changes in product done by the … supplier. • Supplier You • Pronoun shift can never guarantee that • Assertion Uncertainty if you are buying several • Procurement they will all be the same. • Product inconsistency • Necessary condition Microanalysis coding from a study of Configuration Management (CM) (excerpted from Allen, 2003) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 22
Examples of Coding Informant Statement Open code Status accounting is used to report monthly to the Project Board. •CM process Main difficulty is in getting people to buy-in to CM. •People difficulty 3rd parties have a preconceived set of established tools and are •People difficulty not willing to see the in-house point of view •Tool difficulty Developers saw CM as a control mechanism rather than a helpful •Not helpful tool. •Control •People difficulty Keypoint coding from a study of Configuration Management (CM) (excerpted from Allen, 2003) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 23
Examples of Coding Coding example from Charmaz (2006) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 24
Examples of Coding Chat question Informant’s Chat Answer Open Code Axial Code Q. what was your goal A. put some structure • Structure • Purpose/structure (or goals) in using around the content I around content collections? collect/create around my content • Self topic for me and readers • For self • Audience • For others Q. what kind of A. taxonomy By Topic I • Structure • Purpose/taxonomy structure? guess • Taxonomy Q. did you make A. both: what's good for me • Collection • Audience collections for yourself, is good for my readers ☺ for both self • Self and other collections for and others your readers? or were all the collections for both "audiences" Q. who are your A. sales teams, technical • Readers • Audience/Sales-team readers? teams I do this basically for • Sales team • Audience/Tech-team the sellers and supporting • Technical • Technology/team- communities team room in the web1.0 world I used • Prior teamrooms technology I needed an alternative Open coding and axial coding from a study of Collections in a social file-sharing service (data from Muller et al., 2009) 25
Examples of Coding Productivity & A Efficiency B COLLECTIVEI HUMAN Co Goals s’ al st rse nic ELEMENTS/ACTORS C Nu Tech g Str onta al/ vin Nurses’, physicians’, and others’ Patient/ ate inm nic egi gie en Cli Car professional organizations Customer s t Hospitals, chains, and hospital associations Pa Satisfaction tie HMOs, state and private insurers ital nt Discourses Hosp ators/ Pharmaceutical and medical supply s ls nge in istr companies sA Adm agers s a rse Man r se cou Nu Dis Pri va DISCURSIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF Kn Invis t Co e Ins INDIVIDUAL AND/OR COLLECTIVE N ow ibl ur led e mp ura HUMAN ACTORS se Sk ges an nc s ills & ies e Nurses as caring/angels of mercy/”good t men on mothers” imagery nage nts Ma ulta oti g Em ivin Patients as needy, demanding Cons lth s’ g ea rse Care “Everyone’s so different”/patient uniqueness H Nu rk/ me des o Physicians as unavailable Ho Ai W Wo Administrators as manipulative Healt rk Management consultants as heartless Main h Str Red te “Everybody’s So ate esi Orga nance gie gn nizati Different” s ons C Work Redesign “Everybody’s So Strategies Different” Nurses as Angels Discourses Patients Home Health Aides Nurses Private Insurance Nurses’ Emotion Companies Work/Caregiving Nurses’ Cost Containment Invisible Clinical/Technical Strategies Knowledges & Health Caregiving Skills Maintenance Organizations Situational maps excerpted and redrawn from Clarke (2005). A. “Messy” situational map. B. “Ordered” situational map. C. Relationship map. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 26
Data Components & Analytic Practices Closure • Core concept – The (emergent) topic Memos Memos Constructing, Integrating, • Selective coding Memos Connecting/Interrelating – Concepts/Dimensions Memos Memos Clustering, • Axial coding Memos Parameterizing – Categories Memos Defining, • Open coding Memos Memos Aggregating – Basic themes • Data Stern: “If data are the building blocks of the developing theory, [then] memos are the mortar.” Coding starts with the first data Memos are repeatedly reread and sorted Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 27
Discerning Structure in Data Memos Memos Memos ry ive Theo Sub stant Core Concept Concepts Categories Codes Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 28
Method in Grounded Theory Straussian GT Glaserian GT • Balance data and formal theory • Radical focus on data • Emphasis on practices • Emphasis on experience • Taxonomy of coding actions – Induction and emergence – Open, axial, selective – Theoretical sensitivity – Closure tends to occur later, and – Importance of the mentor organizes subsequent coding – Reduced requirement for • Broad causative model - “The verbatim quotations PARADIGM” • Coding actions are less – Causal conditions formalized – Phenomena – Closure tends to occur earlier, – Context and dominates coding – Intervening conditions • No broad causative model – Action/interaction strategies – Consequences Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 29
Method in Grounded Theory Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Glaserian Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 30
Substantive Theory from Data • Everything is data • Keep an open mind by postponing any reading of research literature Formal Theory • Field notes instead of Memos Theoretical Memos Memos verbatim records ry ive Theo • Don’t talk – write Sub stant Theoretical Coding memos! Selective Coding Closure Open or Substantive Coding Memos Memos Memos Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 31
Method in Grounded Theory Straussian GT Glaserian GT • Balance data and formal theory • Radical focus on data • Emphasis on practices • Emphasis on experience • Taxonomy of coding actions – Induction and emergence – Open, axial, selective – Theoretical sensitivity – Closure tends to occur later, and – Importance of the mentor organizes subsequent coding – Reduced requirement for • Broad causative model - “The verbatim quotations PARADIGM” • Coding actions are less – Causal conditions formalized – Phenomena – Closure tends to occur earlier, – Context and dominates coding – Intervening conditions • No broad causative model – Action/interaction strategies – Consequences Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 32
Method in Grounded Theory Straussian GT Glaserian GT • Balance data and formal theory • Radical focus on data • Emphasis on practices • Emphasis on experience • Taxonomy of coding actions – Induction and emergence – Open, axial, selective – Theoretical sensitivity – Closure tends to occur later, and – Importance of the mentor organizes subsequent coding – Reduced requirement for • Broad causative model - “The verbatim quotations PARADIGM” • Coding actions are less – Causal conditions formalized – Phenomena – Closure tends to occur earlier, – Context and dominates coding – Intervening conditions • No broad causative model – Action/interaction strategies – Consequences Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 33
Theory through Constant Comparison • Compare data with data – Codes, categories, concepts • Compare data with your theory (substantive theory) – Aggregating, parameterizing, constructing – Iterative theory-building • Compare data and substantive theory with formal theory Record your observations, thoughts, developing theory in memos 34
Memo-Writing: More than Field Notes • Guiding data collection and coding Memos Memos Memos – “What is this data a study of?” (Glaser) • Guiding theoretical sampling – Where else should I be looking? What site would provide a good test of my competing hypotheses? • Guiding development of substantive theory – Begin writing memos with the first data – Define a code – Record informal hypotheses, for subsequent test – Describe relationships of codes to categories, and categories to the core concept Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 35
Memo-Writing: More than Field Notes • Guiding data collection and coding Memos Memos Memos – “What is this data a study of?” (Glaser) • Guiding theoretical sampling – Where else should I be looking? What site would provide a good test of my competing hypotheses? • Guiding development of substantive theory – Begin writing memos with the first data – Define a code Charmaz: “Memo-writing constitutes a crucial method in – Record informalgrounded theory because it prompts you to analyze your hypotheses, for subsequent test – Describe relationships of codes to categories, and [N]ote where data and codes early in the research process…. categories to the coreare on firm ground, and where you are making you concept conjectures. Then go back to the field to check your conjectures.” Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 36
How Big is a Memo? • Dick 2005: – “Carry file cards in your pocket” – Write multiple memos on each file card • Clarke’s Relationship Map Work Redesign “Everybody ’s So Strategies Different ” Nurses as Angels Discourses Patients Home Health Aides Nurses Private Insurance Nurses ’ Emotion Companies Work/ Caregiving Nurses ’ Cost Containment Invisible Clinical/Technical Strategies Knowledges & Health Caregiving Skills Maintenance Organizations Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 37
Essay-like Example from Charmaz Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 38
Late-Stage Memo, integrating dimensions Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 39
Iteration through Theoretical Sampling • Constant comparison and substantive theorizing – Strategy of abduction • How could I be wrong? (consider multiple, competing informal hypotheses) • How could I test for disconfirmation of what I think is going on? – Go back to the data I already have – Choose the next “site” to test for disconfirmation • What is a “site”? – Person with theoretically-relevant attributes – Team in the appropriate department or geography or discipline Increasing cost – Community that differs from previously-studied Decreasing number communities in a theoretically-important way – Organization or enterprise with significant contrasts to those that I have already studied Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 40
Iteration through Theoretical Sampling • Constant comparison and substantive theorizing – What do I think is going on? • Abduction: How could I be wrong? (consider multiple, competing informal hypotheses) – How could I test for disconfirmation of what I think is going on? – Go back to the data I already have – Choose the next “site” to test for disconfirmation • What is a “site”? Starr: “Codes allow us to know about the field we study, and yet carry the abstraction of the new… – Person with theoretically-relevant attributes When this process is repeated, and constantly – Team in the appropriate compared across spaces and across data… department or geography or discipline this is known as theoretical sampling… cost Increasing – Community that differs from previously-studied Theoretical sampling stretches the Decreasing number codes, forcing communities in a theoretically-important way of the object… taking a other sorts of knowledge – Organization or enterprise with significant it through the data… code and moving contrasts to those that I havefractur[ing] both code and data.” already studied Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 41
Iteration through Theoretical Sampling • A first theory is necessarily localized to a single site or person or data-source – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find my second site to test my initial theory? • A second theory is usually broader and stronger – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find Closure my next site for further abductive testing? • Successive theories gain in ry breadth and depth… nt ive T heo sta Sub • Through iterations, theory becomes both descriptive & abstract Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 42
Iteration through Theoretical Sampling • A first theory is necessarily localized to a single site or person or data-source – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find my second site to test my initial theory? • A second theory is usually broader and stronger – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find Closure my next site for further abductive testing? • Successive theories gain in breadth and depth… eory ntive Th Su bsta • Through iterations, Charmaz: “Consistent with the logic of grounded theory, theoretical sampling is theory becomes both emergent. Your developing ideas shape what descriptive & abstract you do and the questions you pose while theoretical sampling.” Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 43
Theory is Co-Constructed with Description Closure Closure Th eory sta ntive Memos Memos Sub Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Data • Begin coding and theorizing with the first data • Constant comparison with data and theory • Abductive (disconfirmatory) testing / theoretical sampling • Iterations of coding and theorizing/memo-writing/memo-sorting • But… when do you ever stop? Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 44
Stopping Rules • By contrast, in conventional hypothesis testing: – Decide how much data I need, collect it, test it Done! • In GT, when is theoretical sampling complete? – Academic study • “Continue to sample until you have saturated your categories” – Enterprise study • “Continue to sample until Friday” • “Saturated categories” – I know the topic of my project (I’ve chosen or constructed my core concept[s]) – I’ve understood the relationship of those concepts to each of the other concepts and categories – The data are not telling me anything new about my chosen topic Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 45
Stopping Rules • By contrast, in conventional “I realized that I had reached the Stern: hypothesis testing – Decide how much data I point of saturationit, test it[informant] need, collect when the Done! was telling me how when he was a small • In GT, when is theoretical sampling complete? shot child he stood witness as his mother his father dead, and I was bored. I made – Academic study all the right noises… but I knew that my • “Continue to sample until you have saturated your study had come to data collection for that categories” – Enterprise study an end.” (italics in the original) • “Continue to sample until Friday” • “Saturated categories” – I know the topic of my project (I’ve chosen or constructed my core concept[s]) – I’ve understood the relationship of those concepts to each of the other concepts and categories – The data are not telling me anything new about my chosen topic Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 46
Writing and Reporting • Working with memos – Sorting on “a large desk,” “or the floor” Memos Closure Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Dimension Category • Clustering Memos Memos • Categorizing Memos Memos Memos Memos • Dimensionalizing • Relating Some people say you write the Report from the memos – Relationship with each of the other categories/dimensions Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 47
Controversies in Theory Development • When and how to use “formal theory”? Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Dimension Memos Category Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos External theories / Research literature Glaser Strauss Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 48
Quality of Grounded Theory Reports • Difficult to evaluate in conventional writing – in sociology or in HCI and CSCW – “Heuristics from grounded theory” (Thom-Santelli, Muller, & Millen, 2008) – Often the only citation is to Discovery of Grounded Theory, 1967 • Increasingly, “grounded theory” is mentioned without any citation – Reports on the detailed coding methodologies and theoretical iterations are terse or non-existent • The specific framework may not be stated explicitly (e.g., Glaserian, Straussian, one of the 2nd generation, etc.) – Coding is described with isolated references to “axial coding” and little else Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 49
Proposed Clues for Evaluation (1) • References and citations – Are there specific citation(s) of grounded theory method(s)? Statements about methodological choices? Can you understand how the authors constructed their substantive theory? • Methods – If Straussian (e.g., “axial coding”), can you discern multiple categories, concepts, or dimensions? – If Glaserian (e.g., “emergence”), how is the emergence described? • Glaser argued against verbatim quotations. Does that strategy serve HCI and CSCW goals? – Are reference sets of categories invoked? from what source? (unlikely in HCI and CSCW) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 50
Proposed Clues for Evaluation (2) • Findings (Straussian criteria) – For findings that support major claims, do they occur at all sites, or are those crucial findings associated with all major attributes? • If not, how do the authors account for selective occurrence? – Are there multiple categories, and are they well integrated with the core concept (topic) of the paper? • Bonus: Is each concept or dimension presented with its parameters? • Findings (Glaserian criteria) – Surface validity – Internal consistency and “harmony” (constructs interrelated, linked to core concept – Good balance of description and/vs. abstraction – Integrated with broader literature Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 51
Conclusion • Uses of grounded theory – Explore new domains – Leverage human tendency to interpret and theorize • Practices of grounded theory – Begin coding and theorizing with the first data – Constant comparison with data and theory – Abductive (disconfirmatory) testing – Iterations of coding and theorizing • Strengths of grounded theory – Bring data into focus and depth – Build theory that is descriptive, abstract, and powerful – … With discipline, rigor, and quality Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 52
Major Sources • Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1967. • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.L., Basics of qualitative research 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2008. • Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.( eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. • Morse, J.M., Stern, P.N., Corbin, J., Bowers, B., Charmaz, K., & Clarke, A.E., Developing grounded theory: The second generation. Walnut Creek, CA, USA: Left Coast Press, 2009. – Includes Glaserian grounded theory; Straussian grounded theory; constructivist grounded theory methodology; situational analysis; dimensional analysis Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 53
Methods and Processes • Charmaz, K., Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2006. • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.L., Basics of qualitative research 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2008. (also on previous slide) – “the cookbook” • Locke, K., Grounded theory in management research. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2001. • Chapters 4-13 in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K., The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 54
Additional Sources • Common history – Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., Awareness of dying. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1965. – Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1967. – Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., A time for dying. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1968. – Strauss, A.L., & Glaser, B.G., Anguish. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1970. • Glaserian grounded theory – Glaser, B.G., Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1978. – Glaser, B.G., Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1992. – Glaser, B.G., Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1998. • Straussian grounded theory – Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.L., Basics of qualitative research 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2008. – Schatzman, L., & Strauss, A.L., Field research: Strategies for a natural sociology. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall, 1973. – Strauss, A.L., Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge, 1987. – Strauss, A.L., Continual permutations of action. New York, NY, USA: Aldine, 1993. • Constructivist grounded theory – Charmaz, K., Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2006. – Charmaz, K., ‘Grounded theory,’ in Ritzer, G. (ed.), Encyclopedia of sociology. Cambridge, MA, USA: Blackwell, 2006. • Situational analysis – Clarke, A.E., Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2005. • Dimensional analysis – Schatzman, L., ‘Dimensional analysis: Notes on an alternative approach to the grounding of theory in qualitative research,’ in Maines, D.R. (ed), Social organization and social process. New York, NY, USA: Aldine, 1991. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 55
Quality and Rigor • Chiovitti, R.F., & Piran, N., ‘Rigour and grounded theory research,’ J. Adv. Nurs. 44 (4), 2003. • Haig, B.D., ‘Grounded theory as scientific method,’ Phil. Educ. 2005. • Stern, P.N., ‘Properties for growing grounded theory,’ in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.(eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. • Suddaby, R., ‘From the editors: What grounded theory is not,’ Acad. Mgmt. J. 49 (4), 2006. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 56
Essays and Discussions • Diversity in grounded theory method – Kelle, U., ‘”Emergence” vs. “forcing” of empirical data? A crucial problem of “grounded theory” reconsidered. Forum: Qual. Soc. Res. 6(2), May 2005. – van Niekerk, J.C., & Roods, JD., ‘Glaserian and Straussian grounded theory: Similar or completely different? Proc. SAICSIT 2009. • Coding – Starr, S.L., ‘Living grounded theory,’ in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.(eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. • “An open mind is not in an empty head” – Bowen, G.A., ‘Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts,’ Int. J. Qual. Methods 5(3), Sep. 2006. – Stern, P.N., ‘Properties for growing grounded theory,’ in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.(eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 57
30 Examples • Bertram, D., Voida, A., Greenberg, S., & Walker, R., ‘Communication, collaboration, and bugs: The social nature of issue tracking in small, collocated teams. Proc CSCW 2010. • Boden, A., Nett, B., & Wulf, V., ‘Articulation work in small-scale offshore software development projects.’ Proc CHASE 2008. • Cannay, S., ‘A grounded theory investigation of patient empowerment in e-healthcare,’ Proc. AMCIS 2007. • de Souza, C.,R.B., Redmiles, D., Cheng, L.-T., Millen, D., & Patterson, J., ‘Sometimes you need to see through walls – A field study of application programmer interfaces.’ Proc CSCW 2004. • Goede, R., & de Villiers, C., ‘The applicability of grounded theory as research methodology in studies on the use of methodologies in IS practices,’ Proc. SAITSIC 2003. • Graham, C., Cheverst, K., & Rouncefield, M., ‘Technology for the humdrum: Trajectories, interactional needs and a care setting.’ Proc OZCHI 2005. • Hevner, A.R., Collins, R.W., & Garfield, M.J., ‘Product and project challenges in electronic commerce software development.’ SIGMIS Database 33(4), 2002. • Hunter, K., Hart, S., Egbu, C., & Kelly, J., ‘Grounded theory: Its diversification and application through two examples from research studies on knowledge and value management,’ Elec. J. Bus. Res. Meth. 3(1), 2005. • Kriplean, T., Beschastnikh, I., McDonald, D.W., & Golder, S.A., ‘Community, consensus, coercion, control: CS*W or how policy mediates mass participation.’ Proc GROUP 2007. • Luther, K., & Bruckman, A., ‘Leadership in online creative collaboration.’ Proc CSCW 2008i. • Mann, P., ‘Design for design: Support for creative practice in computer-supported collaborative work (CSCW) in design.’ Proc C&C 2005. • Mark, G., & Semaan, B., ‘Resilience in collaboration: Technology as a resource for new patterns of action.’ Proc CSCW 2008. • Matavire, R., & Brown, I., ‘Investigating the use of “grounded theory” in information systems research,’ Proc. SAICSIT 2008. • McConnell, D., ‘Complexity, harmony and diversity of learning in collaborative e-learning continuing professional development groups.’ Proc CSCL 2002. • McDonald, D.W., McCarthy, J.F., Soroczak, S., Nguyen, D.H., & Rashid, A.M., ‘Proactive displays: Supporting awareness in fluid social environments.’ TOCHI 14(4), 2008. • Mentis, H.M., Reddy, M., & Rosson, M.B., ‘Invisible emotion: Information and interaction in an emergency room.’ Proc CSCW 2010. • Muller, M.J., Millen, D.R., & Feinberg, J., ‘Information curators in an enterprise file-sharing service’ Proc. ECSCW 2009. • Poole, E.S., Chetty, M., Morgan, T., Grinter, R.E., & Edwards, W.K., ‘Computer help at home: Methods and motivations for informal technical support.’ Proc CHI 2009. • Redhead, F., & Brereton, M., ‘A qualitative analysis of local community communications.’ Proc OZCHI 2006. • Rode, J.A., ‘The roles that make the domestic work.’ Proc CSCW 2010. • Sarker, S., Lau, F., & Sahey, S., ‘Using an adapted grounded theory approach for inductive theory building about virtual team development,’ Data Base for Adv. Info. Sys. 32(1), 2001. • Scholl, H.J., ‘Current practices in e-government0induced business process change (BPC).’ Proc dg.04, 2004. • Selvaraj, N., & Fields, B., ‘A grounded theory approach towards conceptualizing CIS for heterogeneous work communities,’ Proc. HCI 2009. • Sousa, C.A.A., & Hendriks, P.H.J., ‘The diving bell and the butterfly: The need for grounded theory in developing a knowledge based view of organizations,’ Org. Res. Meth. 9(3), 2006. • Setlock, L.D., & Fussell, S.R., ‘What’s it worth to you? The costs and affordances of CMC tools to Asian and American Users.’ Proc CSCW 2010. • Swallow, D., Blythe, M., & Wright, P., ‘Grounding experience: Relating theory and method to evaluate the user experience of smartphones.’ Proc EACE 2005. • Thom-Santelli, J., Cosley, D., & Gay, G., ‘What’s mine is mine: Territoriality in collaborative authoring,’ Proc. CHI 2009. • Thom-Santelli, J., Muller, M.J., & Millen, D.R., ‘Social tagging roles: Publishers, evangelists, leaders,’ Proc. CHI 2008. • Weisinger, J.Y., & Salipante, P.F., ‘A grounded theory for building ethnically bridging social capital in voluntary organizations,’ Nonprofit & Vol. Sec. Quarterly 34(1), 2005. • Wilson, E.J., & Vlosky, R.P., ‘Partnering relationship activities: Building theory from case study research,’ J. Bus. Res. 39(1), 1997. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 58

More Related Content

PPTX
1. Introduction to qualitative research by Elmusharaf
byReproductive & Child Health Research Unit (RCRU)
 
PPTX
Mixed Method Research Methodology
byKhairul Shafee Kalid
 
PPTX
Grounded Theory
byGhulam Hasnain
 
PPTX
Grounded theory research
byDr. Hina Kaynat
 
PPT
Presentation Validity & Reliability
bysongoten77
 
PPTX
Ethnographic research
byLance Gerard G. Abalos LPT, MA
 
DOCX
Ethnography
bywawaaa789
 
PPTX
ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH
byMAHESWARI JAIKUMAR
 
1. Introduction to qualitative research by Elmusharaf
byReproductive & Child Health Research Unit (RCRU)
 
Mixed Method Research Methodology
byKhairul Shafee Kalid
 
Grounded Theory
byGhulam Hasnain
 
Grounded theory research
byDr. Hina Kaynat
 
Presentation Validity & Reliability
bysongoten77
 
Ethnographic research
byLance Gerard G. Abalos LPT, MA
 
Ethnography
bywawaaa789
 
ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH
byMAHESWARI JAIKUMAR
 

What's hot

PPTX
Understanding philosophy of research
bywaqar ahmad
 
PPTX
Mixed method research
bymathewrebecca
 
PPT
Qualitative Research Methods
byJukka Peltokoski
 
PPTX
types of qualitative research
byhamid gittan
 
PPT
Mixed method
byPelangi Suria
 
PPTX
Grounded theory
byNorhidayah Badrul Hisham
 
PPTX
Mixed Method Research.pptx
byDevarajuBn
 
PPTX
Mixed methods research
byNajah M. Algolaip
 
PPT
Grounded Theory
byNorshim Hashim
 
PPSX
Grounded theory
byRebaz Ameen
 
PPTX
Survey research
byDr. Hina Kaynat
 
PPT
Basic research
byJahanzeb Jahan
 
PDF
Grounded theory methodology of qualitative data analysis
byDr. Shiv S Tripathi
 
PDF
content analysis
byEssam Obaid
 
PPTX
research Qualitative vs. quantitative research
bygagan deep
 
PPTX
Grounded Theory
byGautam Kumar
 
PPTX
Sampling in qualitative research
byDr. V Vorvoreanu
 
PPTX
TSLB3143 Topic 1e Ethnography Research
byYee Bee Choo
 
PPTX
Philosophy of Research By Zewde Alemayehu Tilahun
byzewde alemayehu
 
PPTX
Ethnographic research (2)
byLance Gerard G. Abalos LPT, MA
 
Understanding philosophy of research
bywaqar ahmad
 
Mixed method research
bymathewrebecca
 
Qualitative Research Methods
byJukka Peltokoski
 
types of qualitative research
byhamid gittan
 
Mixed method
byPelangi Suria
 
Grounded theory
byNorhidayah Badrul Hisham
 
Mixed Method Research.pptx
byDevarajuBn
 
Mixed methods research
byNajah M. Algolaip
 
Grounded Theory
byNorshim Hashim
 
Grounded theory
byRebaz Ameen
 
Survey research
byDr. Hina Kaynat
 
Basic research
byJahanzeb Jahan
 
Grounded theory methodology of qualitative data analysis
byDr. Shiv S Tripathi
 
content analysis
byEssam Obaid
 
research Qualitative vs. quantitative research
bygagan deep
 
Grounded Theory
byGautam Kumar
 
Sampling in qualitative research
byDr. V Vorvoreanu
 
TSLB3143 Topic 1e Ethnography Research
byYee Bee Choo
 
Philosophy of Research By Zewde Alemayehu Tilahun
byzewde alemayehu
 
Ethnographic research (2)
byLance Gerard G. Abalos LPT, MA
 

Viewers also liked

PPTX
Grounded Theory Presentation
byLarry Weas
 
PPTX
Grounded Theory
byKomal Raja
 
PDF
Grounded Theory: an Introduction (updated Jan 2011)
byHora Tjitra
 
PPTX
Grounded theory
bySehriban Bugday
 
PDF
Qualitative codes and coding
byHeather Ford
 
PDF
Grounded Theory and Design
byMithat Konar
 
PPT
Nurs 508 ass i, pls grounded theory
byJJ Bellcote
 
PPTX
Grounded theory research method
byMarie Faith Cayas
 
PPTX
"UX for the win!" at #CityMash: how we did grounded theory coding of qualitat...
byAndrew Preater
 
PPTX
Analyzing qualitative data 4 13-17
bytjcarter
 
PDF
Qualitative Research Methods in UX design - Markus Heberlein
byuxtalktokyo
 
Grounded Theory Presentation
byLarry Weas
 
Grounded Theory
byKomal Raja
 
Grounded Theory: an Introduction (updated Jan 2011)
byHora Tjitra
 
Grounded theory
bySehriban Bugday
 
Qualitative codes and coding
byHeather Ford
 
Grounded Theory and Design
byMithat Konar
 
Nurs 508 ass i, pls grounded theory
byJJ Bellcote
 
Grounded theory research method
byMarie Faith Cayas
 
"UX for the win!" at #CityMash: how we did grounded theory coding of qualitat...
byAndrew Preater
 
Analyzing qualitative data 4 13-17
bytjcarter
 
Qualitative Research Methods in UX design - Markus Heberlein
byuxtalktokyo
 

Similar to Grounded Theory Method - Muller

PDF
Grounded Theory Introduction
byTjitra & Associates
 
PPTX
IFI7159 M4
byDavid Lamas
 
PPTX
ISPIM 2012 - Developing grounded theory on organizational innovation
byMLarraza
 
PPTX
Myers Chapter 9 qualitative research.pptx
bynaziaphdmgt189
 
PDF
Tony Bryant Gt June 2009
byLuis Borges Gouveia
 
PDF
A Qualititative Approach To HCI Research
byNathan Mathis
 
PPT
Ethnography, Grounded Theory and Systems Analysis
bylinlinlin
 
PDF
Hcic muller guha davis geyer shami 2015 06-29
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Understanding organizational innovation from its practice
byMLarraza
 
PPTX
Action research for_librarians_carl2012
bysrosenblatt
 
PPTX
Action research for_librarians_carl2012
bysrosenblatt
 
PDF
A Pragmatic Perspective on Software Visualization
byArie van Deursen
 
PDF
User centered design method & wikiwijs
byMerlien Institute
 
PDF
Action Research - David Avison
byguestc990b6
 
PDF
About your research methodology grounded theory. rica viljoen. eskom
byDr Rica Viljoen
 
PPT
We have a DREaM: the Developing Research Excellence & Methods network
byLibrary and Information Science Research Coalition
 
PDF
Grounded theory for geeks
byFrancisco Vasconcellos
 
PPTX
Koios - Collective Intelligence and Crowd sourcing for public good
byRoy Lachica
 
PPT
Canadian Evaluation Society presentation-2011_ final ppt
byDonna Smith-Moncrieffe
 
PDF
Anomalous symmetry succession for seek out
byiaemedu
 
Grounded Theory Introduction
byTjitra & Associates
 
IFI7159 M4
byDavid Lamas
 
ISPIM 2012 - Developing grounded theory on organizational innovation
byMLarraza
 
Myers Chapter 9 qualitative research.pptx
bynaziaphdmgt189
 
Tony Bryant Gt June 2009
byLuis Borges Gouveia
 
A Qualititative Approach To HCI Research
byNathan Mathis
 
Ethnography, Grounded Theory and Systems Analysis
bylinlinlin
 
Hcic muller guha davis geyer shami 2015 06-29
byMichael Muller
 
Understanding organizational innovation from its practice
byMLarraza
 
Action research for_librarians_carl2012
bysrosenblatt
 
Action research for_librarians_carl2012
bysrosenblatt
 
A Pragmatic Perspective on Software Visualization
byArie van Deursen
 
User centered design method & wikiwijs
byMerlien Institute
 
Action Research - David Avison
byguestc990b6
 
About your research methodology grounded theory. rica viljoen. eskom
byDr Rica Viljoen
 
We have a DREaM: the Developing Research Excellence & Methods network
byLibrary and Information Science Research Coalition
 
Grounded theory for geeks
byFrancisco Vasconcellos
 
Koios - Collective Intelligence and Crowd sourcing for public good
byRoy Lachica
 
Canadian Evaluation Society presentation-2011_ final ppt
byDonna Smith-Moncrieffe
 
Anomalous symmetry succession for seek out
byiaemedu
 

More from Michael Muller

PDF
Muller - Grounded Theory Method (revised 2012)
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
eParticipation and Participatory Design
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Hcic muller and liao - participatory design fictions
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Exploring social theory through enterprise social media (muller, ibm research)
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Co proposers in crowdfunding (muller et al. 2016)
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Lurking as trait or situational disposition: Lurking and contributing in ente...
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Usage Of Enterprise File Sharing Service Muller Chi 2010
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Information Curators in an Enterprise File-Sharing Service
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Group 2009 Bateman Muller Freyne
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Return On Contribution (ROC) ECSCW 2009 Muller Et Al
byMichael Muller
 
PDF
Muller and Chua - brainstorming for japan - chi 2012
byMichael Muller
 
Muller - Grounded Theory Method (revised 2012)
byMichael Muller
 
eParticipation and Participatory Design
byMichael Muller
 
Hcic muller and liao - participatory design fictions
byMichael Muller
 
Exploring social theory through enterprise social media (muller, ibm research)
byMichael Muller
 
Co proposers in crowdfunding (muller et al. 2016)
byMichael Muller
 
Lurking as trait or situational disposition: Lurking and contributing in ente...
byMichael Muller
 
Usage Of Enterprise File Sharing Service Muller Chi 2010
byMichael Muller
 
Information Curators in an Enterprise File-Sharing Service
byMichael Muller
 
Group 2009 Bateman Muller Freyne
byMichael Muller
 
Return On Contribution (ROC) ECSCW 2009 Muller Et Al
byMichael Muller
 
Muller and Chua - brainstorming for japan - chi 2012
byMichael Muller
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
Chapter 2 Computer Threat .pdf
byGetnet Tigabie Askale -(GM)
 
PDF
MINDCTI Revenue Release Quarter 3 2025 - Financial Presentation
byMIND CTI
 
PDF
Unlocking Gen AI Capabilities Within UiPath Document Understanding
byDianaGray10
 
PDF
Profiting from Technological Innovation: Managing Intellectual Property to Bu...
byDavid Teece
 
PDF
How Automation Powers Data Quality and Governance at Scale
bySafe Software
 
PDF
5G Explained! A High Level Overview [Introduction]
byLuciano Motta
 
PDF
Laravel Up Running, 3rd Edition A Framework for Building Modern PHP Apps (Mat...
byNEXACORE
 
PDF
6 Insights from the Patron Saint of AI Failure
byScott M. Graffius
 
PDF
Are AI Hallucinations Getting Better or Worse? We Analyzed the Data.
byScott M. Graffius
 
PDF
Top 10 Dedicated Server Providers in Stockholm (Updated Edition).pdf
byAtal Networks
 
PDF
Top 5 Best Dedicated Server Providers in Los Angeles (Updated Edition)
byAtal Networks
 
PDF
Philippine Agricultural Engineering Standard_Hand Tractor .pdf
by6xfrnmdp4b
 
PDF
January Patch Tuesday
byIvanti
 
PPTX
Becoming Frontier for Dynamics 365 Finance PPT
byjonbravetti
 
PPTX
A CIO’s Guide to Salesforce AI Architecture, Governance, and Implementation R...
byKerry Millar
 
PPTX
Fortify Your Digital Defenses with ServiceNow Security Operations by Suma Soft
byGavin Ellis
 
PDF
Pervasive Encryption - Keeping Data Secure.pdf
byPrecisely
 
PPTX
Robot Vacuums are Cleaning Up. The global robot vacuum segment has high marke...
byRobert March
 
PPTX
Webinar: EVerest for Production: Accelerating EV Charger Development w/ Indus...
byDanBrown980551
 
PPTX
congo red stain nd PAS STAIN histopathology
bybushrariaz1240
 
Chapter 2 Computer Threat .pdf
byGetnet Tigabie Askale -(GM)
 
MINDCTI Revenue Release Quarter 3 2025 - Financial Presentation
byMIND CTI
 
Unlocking Gen AI Capabilities Within UiPath Document Understanding
byDianaGray10
 
Profiting from Technological Innovation: Managing Intellectual Property to Bu...
byDavid Teece
 
How Automation Powers Data Quality and Governance at Scale
bySafe Software
 
5G Explained! A High Level Overview [Introduction]
byLuciano Motta
 
Laravel Up Running, 3rd Edition A Framework for Building Modern PHP Apps (Mat...
byNEXACORE
 
6 Insights from the Patron Saint of AI Failure
byScott M. Graffius
 
Are AI Hallucinations Getting Better or Worse? We Analyzed the Data.
byScott M. Graffius
 
Top 10 Dedicated Server Providers in Stockholm (Updated Edition).pdf
byAtal Networks
 
Top 5 Best Dedicated Server Providers in Los Angeles (Updated Edition)
byAtal Networks
 
Philippine Agricultural Engineering Standard_Hand Tractor .pdf
by6xfrnmdp4b
 
January Patch Tuesday
byIvanti
 
Becoming Frontier for Dynamics 365 Finance PPT
byjonbravetti
 
A CIO’s Guide to Salesforce AI Architecture, Governance, and Implementation R...
byKerry Millar
 
Fortify Your Digital Defenses with ServiceNow Security Operations by Suma Soft
byGavin Ellis
 
Pervasive Encryption - Keeping Data Secure.pdf
byPrecisely
 
Robot Vacuums are Cleaning Up. The global robot vacuum segment has high marke...
byRobert March
 
Webinar: EVerest for Production: Accelerating EV Charger Development w/ Indus...
byDanBrown980551
 
congo red stain nd PAS STAIN histopathology
bybushrariaz1240
 

Grounded Theory Method - Muller

  • 1.
    Grounded Theory Methods Michael Muller IBM Research Cambridge, MA, USA michael_muller@us.ibm.com Thanks to: Sandra Kogan, Jennifer Thom-Santelli, David R Millen, Jane Preston Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 1
  • 2.
    Outline • An orientation toward Grounded Theory Method • Diversity, diversity, diversity… – From Glaser & Strauss Glaser vs. Strauss – “The second generation” of grounded theorists • One view of methods and practices • Quality and rigor • Conclusion • Major sources • Software packages Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 2
  • 3.
    Why Grounded Theory? • 63% of citations to qualitative analysis in Social Science Citation Index • Increasing references to Grounded Theory in ACM Digital Library • Useful for qualitative and quantitative data 140 • Combination of open mind with rigor and quality 120 Number of Papers returned by Search • However, not well-understood in HCI and CSCW 100 – Qualitative analysis vs. theory-building 80 – Use of quantitative data as well as qualitative 60 – Diversity in methodology 40 – Does grounded theory offer … methodology? theory? heuristics? 20 procedures? 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 3
  • 4.
    Why Grounded Theory? • 63% of citations to qualitative analysis in Social Science Citation Index • Increasing references to Grounded Theory in ACM Digital Library • Method for exploring a domain without a dominant theory • Useful for qualitative and quantitative data • Combination of open mind with rigor and quality • However, not well-understood in HCI and CSCW – Qualitative analysis vs. theory-building – Use of quantitative data as well as qualitative – Diversity in methodology – Does grounded theory offer … methodology? theory? heuristics? procedures? Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 4
  • 5.
    Answer Questions suchas… • How do decisions happen in this organizational culture? – Interview decision-makers and contributors – Choose among many possible interviewees – Describe a contextualized theory of decision-making • What are the value systems of a group of companies? – Examine public documents in detail – Choose among a huge library of documents – Understand values and value trade-offs in context • What kinds of online communities? – Analyze members, shared “goods,” social networks – in sum, and over community lifecycle – Choose among thousands of communities – Derive a typography of online communities – Develop a lifecycle model for each type of community Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 5
  • 6.
    A Way WeOften (want to) Think • We want to think early about interpretation and theory • Grounded theory methodology offers a disciplined way to do this • Why pretend that we don’t interpret and theorize? – Why not turn our own tendencies to advantage! Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 6
  • 7.
    A Way WeOften (want to) Think • We want to think early about interpretation and theory • Grounded theory methodology offers a disciplined way to do this • Why pretend that we don’t interpret and theorize? – Why not turn our own tendencies to advantage! Charmaz: “Grounded theory methods consist of simultaneous data collection and analysis, with each informing and focusing the other throughout the research process. As grounded theorists, we begin our analysis early to help us focus further data collection. In turn, we use these focused data to refine our emerging analyses. Grounded theory entails developing increasingly abstract ideas about research participants’ meanings, actions, and worlds and seeking specific data to fill out, refine, and check the emerging conceptual categories...” Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 7
  • 8.
    The Right Approachfor Some Problems • What grounded theory is good for… – Exploration – Disciplined development of new ideas – Finding theory and structure in domains where there is no a priori guidance – Keeping an open mind as you explore a new domain • “An open mind is not in an empty head” – Working with qualitative or quantitative data • And what grounded theory is not good for… – Hypothesis testing – Evaluating a formal (e.g., published) theory – Confirming a hunch Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 8
  • 9.
    For Example: Studyof Online Communities (with Kate Ehrlich, Tara Matthews, Inbal Ronen, Ido Guy, Elizabeth Daly, David Millen…) • 8600+ online enterprise communities • One software environment, but hints of many variations • Read some communities, join some communities • Are they all Communities of Practice? initial “throw-away” theory – Test by looking for exceptions strategy of abduction – There are big virtual teams disconfirm initial theory – … tech communities, Rec communities – Idea Labs – very high participation rates theoretical sampling for breadth • Examine goal statements, patterns of membership, patterns of participation, begin to look for systematic differences claims of impact – Examine reputation, SNA… use concepts from research literature • Theory of enterprise online communities iteratively develop stronger theory – Focusing on theories of user appropriation more concepts from research literature • Leading to strong quantitative comparisons generate hypotheses for non-GT tests of CoP, Team, Tech, Rec, Idea Labs Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 9
  • 10.
    Summary of theExample: Online Communities • Theory – Social media are “blank” until used • Carroll: “Completing design through use” – Users appropriate social media to create specific genres for specific organizational purposes – Users can navigate easily from one genre to another – Revisions of social construction of technology theory, adaptive structuration theory, social learning theory • Application – Matthews et al.: Collaboration personas – Erhlich et al.: Users who contribute more than expected – []: Metrics and analytics for the “health” of Communities of Practice, Teams, Technical Communities, Recreational Communities, Idea Labs
  • 11.
    Strengths and Weaknessesof GT • Strengths – Outcomes are grounded in the data – Theory is continually tested through constant comparison – Data-collection is guided by theoretical sampling – Highlights the agency and responsibility of the researcher(s) • Weaknesses – Too many diverse approaches • How to choose? • How to evaluate? – Tension between “cookbooks” and “emergence” – Stopping rules are unclear – Highlights the agency and responsibility of the researcher(s) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 11
  • 12.
    A Summary Viewof Grounded Theory Formal Theory ry ive Theo Sub stant Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 12
  • 13.
    A Summary Viewof Grounded Theory Charmaz: “Grounded theory methods consist of simultaneous data collection and analysis, with each informing and focusing the other throughout the research process. As grounded theorists, we begin our Formal Theory analysis early to help us focus further data collection. In turn, we use these focused data to refine our emerging analyses. Grounded theory entails developing increasingly abstract ideas about research ry participants’ meanings, actions, and worlds and seeking specific data to e Theo antiv fill out, refine, and check the emerging conceptual categories...” t Subs Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 13
  • 14.
    Diversity in GroundedTheory Method (GTM) “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 14
  • 15.
    Diversity in GroundedTheory Method (GTM) “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Starr: “a manifesto for freedom from the sterile methods that permeated social sciences atStrauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 the time.” Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 15
  • 16.
    Straussian Grounded TheoryMethod “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 16
  • 17.
    Glaserian Grounded TheoryMethod “The Second Generation” Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Dewey Mead Induction Pierce Abduction Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 17
  • 18.
    Method in GroundedTheory Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Straussian Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 18
  • 19.
    Grounding the Theoryin the Data Formal Theory ry ive Theo Sub stant Core Concept Dimensions Concepts / Categories Codes Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 19
  • 20.
    Data Components &Analytic Practices • Core concept – The (emergent) topic • Selective coding “Emergence” (constructing) – Concepts/Dimensions • Axial coding Parameterizing – Categories • Open coding Aggregating – Basic themes • Data Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 20
  • 21.
    Data Components &Analytic Practices • Core concept Starr: “A code sets up a relationship – The (emergent) topic with your data, and with your respondents…. a matter of both • Selective coding “Emergence” (constructing) attachment and separation…. Codes allow us to know about the field we – Concepts/Dimensions study, and yet carry the abstraction • Axial coding of the new.” Parameterizing – Categories • Open coding Aggregating – Basic themes • Data Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 21
  • 22.
    Examples of Coding Informant Statement Open code From my perspective • Personal view the main challenge is • Assertion in changes in technology • Changes in technology or the product improvement • Changes in product done by the … supplier. • Supplier You • Pronoun shift can never guarantee that • Assertion Uncertainty if you are buying several • Procurement they will all be the same. • Product inconsistency • Necessary condition Microanalysis coding from a study of Configuration Management (CM) (excerpted from Allen, 2003) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 22
  • 23.
    Examples of Coding Informant Statement Open code Status accounting is used to report monthly to the Project Board. •CM process Main difficulty is in getting people to buy-in to CM. •People difficulty 3rd parties have a preconceived set of established tools and are •People difficulty not willing to see the in-house point of view •Tool difficulty Developers saw CM as a control mechanism rather than a helpful •Not helpful tool. •Control •People difficulty Keypoint coding from a study of Configuration Management (CM) (excerpted from Allen, 2003) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 23
  • 24.
    Examples of Coding Coding example from Charmaz (2006) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 24
  • 25.
    Examples of Coding Chatquestion Informant’s Chat Answer Open Code Axial Code Q. what was your goal A. put some structure • Structure • Purpose/structure (or goals) in using around the content I around content collections? collect/create around my content • Self topic for me and readers • For self • Audience • For others Q. what kind of A. taxonomy By Topic I • Structure • Purpose/taxonomy structure? guess • Taxonomy Q. did you make A. both: what's good for me • Collection • Audience collections for yourself, is good for my readers ☺ for both self • Self and other collections for and others your readers? or were all the collections for both "audiences" Q. who are your A. sales teams, technical • Readers • Audience/Sales-team readers? teams I do this basically for • Sales team • Audience/Tech-team the sellers and supporting • Technical • Technology/team- communities team room in the web1.0 world I used • Prior teamrooms technology I needed an alternative Open coding and axial coding from a study of Collections in a social file-sharing service (data from Muller et al., 2009) 25
  • 26.
    Examples of Coding Productivity & A Efficiency B COLLECTIVEI HUMAN Co Goals s’ al st rse nic ELEMENTS/ACTORS C Nu Tech g Str onta al/ vin Nurses’, physicians’, and others’ Patient/ ate inm nic egi gie en Cli Car professional organizations Customer s t Hospitals, chains, and hospital associations Pa Satisfaction tie HMOs, state and private insurers ital nt Discourses Hosp ators/ Pharmaceutical and medical supply s ls nge in istr companies sA Adm agers s a rse Man r se cou Nu Dis Pri va DISCURSIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF Kn Invis t Co e Ins INDIVIDUAL AND/OR COLLECTIVE N ow ibl ur led e mp ura HUMAN ACTORS se Sk ges an nc s ills & ies e Nurses as caring/angels of mercy/”good t men on mothers” imagery nage nts Ma ulta oti g Em ivin Patients as needy, demanding Cons lth s’ g ea rse Care “Everyone’s so different”/patient uniqueness H Nu rk/ me des o Physicians as unavailable Ho Ai W Wo Administrators as manipulative Healt rk Management consultants as heartless Main h Str Red te “Everybody’s So ate esi Orga nance gie gn nizati Different” s ons C Work Redesign “Everybody’s So Strategies Different” Nurses as Angels Discourses Patients Home Health Aides Nurses Private Insurance Nurses’ Emotion Companies Work/Caregiving Nurses’ Cost Containment Invisible Clinical/Technical Strategies Knowledges & Health Caregiving Skills Maintenance Organizations Situational maps excerpted and redrawn from Clarke (2005). A. “Messy” situational map. B. “Ordered” situational map. C. Relationship map. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 26
  • 27.
    Data Components &Analytic Practices Closure • Core concept – The (emergent) topic Memos Memos Constructing, Integrating, • Selective coding Memos Connecting/Interrelating – Concepts/Dimensions Memos Memos Clustering, • Axial coding Memos Parameterizing – Categories Memos Defining, • Open coding Memos Memos Aggregating – Basic themes • Data Stern: “If data are the building blocks of the developing theory, [then] memos are the mortar.” Coding starts with the first data Memos are repeatedly reread and sorted Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 27
  • 28.
    Discerning Structure inData Memos Memos Memos ry ive Theo Sub stant Core Concept Concepts Categories Codes Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 28
  • 29.
    Method in GroundedTheory Straussian GT Glaserian GT • Balance data and formal theory • Radical focus on data • Emphasis on practices • Emphasis on experience • Taxonomy of coding actions – Induction and emergence – Open, axial, selective – Theoretical sensitivity – Closure tends to occur later, and – Importance of the mentor organizes subsequent coding – Reduced requirement for • Broad causative model - “The verbatim quotations PARADIGM” • Coding actions are less – Causal conditions formalized – Phenomena – Closure tends to occur earlier, – Context and dominates coding – Intervening conditions • No broad causative model – Action/interaction strategies – Consequences Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 29
  • 30.
    Method in GroundedTheory Clarke, Charmaz, Schatzman, Situational analysis Constructivist GTM Dimensional analysis Stern, Corbin, Glaserian GTM Straussian GTM Strauss, Qualitative analysis, 1987 Glaser, Theoretical sensitivity, 1978 Strauss & Corbin, Basics of qualitative Glaser, Emergence vs. forcing, 1992 research, 1990 Glaser & Strauss, The discovery of grounded theory, 1967 Glaserian Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 30
  • 31.
    Substantive Theory fromData • Everything is data • Keep an open mind by postponing any reading of research literature Formal Theory • Field notes instead of Memos Theoretical Memos Memos verbatim records ry ive Theo • Don’t talk – write Sub stant Theoretical Coding memos! Selective Coding Closure Open or Substantive Coding Memos Memos Memos Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 31
  • 32.
    Method in GroundedTheory Straussian GT Glaserian GT • Balance data and formal theory • Radical focus on data • Emphasis on practices • Emphasis on experience • Taxonomy of coding actions – Induction and emergence – Open, axial, selective – Theoretical sensitivity – Closure tends to occur later, and – Importance of the mentor organizes subsequent coding – Reduced requirement for • Broad causative model - “The verbatim quotations PARADIGM” • Coding actions are less – Causal conditions formalized – Phenomena – Closure tends to occur earlier, – Context and dominates coding – Intervening conditions • No broad causative model – Action/interaction strategies – Consequences Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 32
  • 33.
    Method in GroundedTheory Straussian GT Glaserian GT • Balance data and formal theory • Radical focus on data • Emphasis on practices • Emphasis on experience • Taxonomy of coding actions – Induction and emergence – Open, axial, selective – Theoretical sensitivity – Closure tends to occur later, and – Importance of the mentor organizes subsequent coding – Reduced requirement for • Broad causative model - “The verbatim quotations PARADIGM” • Coding actions are less – Causal conditions formalized – Phenomena – Closure tends to occur earlier, – Context and dominates coding – Intervening conditions • No broad causative model – Action/interaction strategies – Consequences Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 33
  • 34.
    Theory through ConstantComparison • Compare data with data – Codes, categories, concepts • Compare data with your theory (substantive theory) – Aggregating, parameterizing, constructing – Iterative theory-building • Compare data and substantive theory with formal theory Record your observations, thoughts, developing theory in memos 34
  • 35.
    Memo-Writing: More thanField Notes • Guiding data collection and coding Memos Memos Memos – “What is this data a study of?” (Glaser) • Guiding theoretical sampling – Where else should I be looking? What site would provide a good test of my competing hypotheses? • Guiding development of substantive theory – Begin writing memos with the first data – Define a code – Record informal hypotheses, for subsequent test – Describe relationships of codes to categories, and categories to the core concept Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 35
  • 36.
    Memo-Writing: More thanField Notes • Guiding data collection and coding Memos Memos Memos – “What is this data a study of?” (Glaser) • Guiding theoretical sampling – Where else should I be looking? What site would provide a good test of my competing hypotheses? • Guiding development of substantive theory – Begin writing memos with the first data – Define a code Charmaz: “Memo-writing constitutes a crucial method in – Record informalgrounded theory because it prompts you to analyze your hypotheses, for subsequent test – Describe relationships of codes to categories, and [N]ote where data and codes early in the research process…. categories to the coreare on firm ground, and where you are making you concept conjectures. Then go back to the field to check your conjectures.” Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 36
  • 37.
    How Big isa Memo? • Dick 2005: – “Carry file cards in your pocket” – Write multiple memos on each file card • Clarke’s Relationship Map Work Redesign “Everybody ’s So Strategies Different ” Nurses as Angels Discourses Patients Home Health Aides Nurses Private Insurance Nurses ’ Emotion Companies Work/ Caregiving Nurses ’ Cost Containment Invisible Clinical/Technical Strategies Knowledges & Health Caregiving Skills Maintenance Organizations Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 37
  • 38.
    Essay-like Example fromCharmaz Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 38
  • 39.
    Late-Stage Memo, integratingdimensions Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 39
  • 40.
    Iteration through TheoreticalSampling • Constant comparison and substantive theorizing – Strategy of abduction • How could I be wrong? (consider multiple, competing informal hypotheses) • How could I test for disconfirmation of what I think is going on? – Go back to the data I already have – Choose the next “site” to test for disconfirmation • What is a “site”? – Person with theoretically-relevant attributes – Team in the appropriate department or geography or discipline Increasing cost – Community that differs from previously-studied Decreasing number communities in a theoretically-important way – Organization or enterprise with significant contrasts to those that I have already studied Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 40
  • 41.
    Iteration through TheoreticalSampling • Constant comparison and substantive theorizing – What do I think is going on? • Abduction: How could I be wrong? (consider multiple, competing informal hypotheses) – How could I test for disconfirmation of what I think is going on? – Go back to the data I already have – Choose the next “site” to test for disconfirmation • What is a “site”? Starr: “Codes allow us to know about the field we study, and yet carry the abstraction of the new… – Person with theoretically-relevant attributes When this process is repeated, and constantly – Team in the appropriate compared across spaces and across data… department or geography or discipline this is known as theoretical sampling… cost Increasing – Community that differs from previously-studied Theoretical sampling stretches the Decreasing number codes, forcing communities in a theoretically-important way of the object… taking a other sorts of knowledge – Organization or enterprise with significant it through the data… code and moving contrasts to those that I havefractur[ing] both code and data.” already studied Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 41
  • 42.
    Iteration through TheoreticalSampling • A first theory is necessarily localized to a single site or person or data-source – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find my second site to test my initial theory? • A second theory is usually broader and stronger – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find Closure my next site for further abductive testing? • Successive theories gain in ry breadth and depth… nt ive T heo sta Sub • Through iterations, theory becomes both descriptive & abstract Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 42
  • 43.
    Iteration through TheoreticalSampling • A first theory is necessarily localized to a single site or person or data-source – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find my second site to test my initial theory? • A second theory is usually broader and stronger – Theoretical sampling: Where should I find Closure my next site for further abductive testing? • Successive theories gain in breadth and depth… eory ntive Th Su bsta • Through iterations, Charmaz: “Consistent with the logic of grounded theory, theoretical sampling is theory becomes both emergent. Your developing ideas shape what descriptive & abstract you do and the questions you pose while theoretical sampling.” Data Time Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 43
  • 44.
    Theory is Co-Constructedwith Description Closure Closure Th eory sta ntive Memos Memos Sub Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Data • Begin coding and theorizing with the first data • Constant comparison with data and theory • Abductive (disconfirmatory) testing / theoretical sampling • Iterations of coding and theorizing/memo-writing/memo-sorting • But… when do you ever stop? Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 44
  • 45.
    Stopping Rules • By contrast, in conventional hypothesis testing: – Decide how much data I need, collect it, test it Done! • In GT, when is theoretical sampling complete? – Academic study • “Continue to sample until you have saturated your categories” – Enterprise study • “Continue to sample until Friday” • “Saturated categories” – I know the topic of my project (I’ve chosen or constructed my core concept[s]) – I’ve understood the relationship of those concepts to each of the other concepts and categories – The data are not telling me anything new about my chosen topic Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 45
  • 46.
    Stopping Rules • By contrast, in conventional “I realized that I had reached the Stern: hypothesis testing – Decide how much data I point of saturationit, test it[informant] need, collect when the Done! was telling me how when he was a small • In GT, when is theoretical sampling complete? shot child he stood witness as his mother his father dead, and I was bored. I made – Academic study all the right noises… but I knew that my • “Continue to sample until you have saturated your study had come to data collection for that categories” – Enterprise study an end.” (italics in the original) • “Continue to sample until Friday” • “Saturated categories” – I know the topic of my project (I’ve chosen or constructed my core concept[s]) – I’ve understood the relationship of those concepts to each of the other concepts and categories – The data are not telling me anything new about my chosen topic Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 46
  • 47.
    Writing and Reporting • Working with memos – Sorting on “a large desk,” “or the floor” Memos Closure Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Dimension Category • Clustering Memos Memos • Categorizing Memos Memos Memos Memos • Dimensionalizing • Relating Some people say you write the Report from the memos – Relationship with each of the other categories/dimensions Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 47
  • 48.
    Controversies in TheoryDevelopment • When and how to use “formal theory”? Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Dimension Memos Category Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos Memos External theories / Research literature Glaser Strauss Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 48
  • 49.
    Quality of GroundedTheory Reports • Difficult to evaluate in conventional writing – in sociology or in HCI and CSCW – “Heuristics from grounded theory” (Thom-Santelli, Muller, & Millen, 2008) – Often the only citation is to Discovery of Grounded Theory, 1967 • Increasingly, “grounded theory” is mentioned without any citation – Reports on the detailed coding methodologies and theoretical iterations are terse or non-existent • The specific framework may not be stated explicitly (e.g., Glaserian, Straussian, one of the 2nd generation, etc.) – Coding is described with isolated references to “axial coding” and little else Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 49
  • 50.
    Proposed Clues forEvaluation (1) • References and citations – Are there specific citation(s) of grounded theory method(s)? Statements about methodological choices? Can you understand how the authors constructed their substantive theory? • Methods – If Straussian (e.g., “axial coding”), can you discern multiple categories, concepts, or dimensions? – If Glaserian (e.g., “emergence”), how is the emergence described? • Glaser argued against verbatim quotations. Does that strategy serve HCI and CSCW goals? – Are reference sets of categories invoked? from what source? (unlikely in HCI and CSCW) Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 50
  • 51.
    Proposed Clues forEvaluation (2) • Findings (Straussian criteria) – For findings that support major claims, do they occur at all sites, or are those crucial findings associated with all major attributes? • If not, how do the authors account for selective occurrence? – Are there multiple categories, and are they well integrated with the core concept (topic) of the paper? • Bonus: Is each concept or dimension presented with its parameters? • Findings (Glaserian criteria) – Surface validity – Internal consistency and “harmony” (constructs interrelated, linked to core concept – Good balance of description and/vs. abstraction – Integrated with broader literature Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 51
  • 52.
    Conclusion • Uses of grounded theory – Explore new domains – Leverage human tendency to interpret and theorize • Practices of grounded theory – Begin coding and theorizing with the first data – Constant comparison with data and theory – Abductive (disconfirmatory) testing – Iterations of coding and theorizing • Strengths of grounded theory – Bring data into focus and depth – Build theory that is descriptive, abstract, and powerful – … With discipline, rigor, and quality Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 52
  • 53.
    Major Sources • Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1967. • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.L., Basics of qualitative research 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2008. • Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.( eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. • Morse, J.M., Stern, P.N., Corbin, J., Bowers, B., Charmaz, K., & Clarke, A.E., Developing grounded theory: The second generation. Walnut Creek, CA, USA: Left Coast Press, 2009. – Includes Glaserian grounded theory; Straussian grounded theory; constructivist grounded theory methodology; situational analysis; dimensional analysis Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 53
  • 54.
    Methods and Processes • Charmaz, K., Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2006. • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.L., Basics of qualitative research 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2008. (also on previous slide) – “the cookbook” • Locke, K., Grounded theory in management research. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2001. • Chapters 4-13 in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K., The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 54
  • 55.
    Additional Sources • Common history – Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., Awareness of dying. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1965. – Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1967. – Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L., A time for dying. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1968. – Strauss, A.L., & Glaser, B.G., Anguish. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1970. • Glaserian grounded theory – Glaser, B.G., Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1978. – Glaser, B.G., Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1992. – Glaser, B.G., Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA, USA: Sociology Press, 1998. • Straussian grounded theory – Corbin, J., & Strauss, A.L., Basics of qualitative research 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2008. – Schatzman, L., & Strauss, A.L., Field research: Strategies for a natural sociology. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall, 1973. – Strauss, A.L., Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge, 1987. – Strauss, A.L., Continual permutations of action. New York, NY, USA: Aldine, 1993. • Constructivist grounded theory – Charmaz, K., Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2006. – Charmaz, K., ‘Grounded theory,’ in Ritzer, G. (ed.), Encyclopedia of sociology. Cambridge, MA, USA: Blackwell, 2006. • Situational analysis – Clarke, A.E., Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2005. • Dimensional analysis – Schatzman, L., ‘Dimensional analysis: Notes on an alternative approach to the grounding of theory in qualitative research,’ in Maines, D.R. (ed), Social organization and social process. New York, NY, USA: Aldine, 1991. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 55
  • 56.
    Quality and Rigor • Chiovitti, R.F., & Piran, N., ‘Rigour and grounded theory research,’ J. Adv. Nurs. 44 (4), 2003. • Haig, B.D., ‘Grounded theory as scientific method,’ Phil. Educ. 2005. • Stern, P.N., ‘Properties for growing grounded theory,’ in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.(eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. • Suddaby, R., ‘From the editors: What grounded theory is not,’ Acad. Mgmt. J. 49 (4), 2006. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 56
  • 57.
    Essays and Discussions • Diversity in grounded theory method – Kelle, U., ‘”Emergence” vs. “forcing” of empirical data? A crucial problem of “grounded theory” reconsidered. Forum: Qual. Soc. Res. 6(2), May 2005. – van Niekerk, J.C., & Roods, JD., ‘Glaserian and Straussian grounded theory: Similar or completely different? Proc. SAICSIT 2009. • Coding – Starr, S.L., ‘Living grounded theory,’ in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.(eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. • “An open mind is not in an empty head” – Bowen, G.A., ‘Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts,’ Int. J. Qual. Methods 5(3), Sep. 2006. – Stern, P.N., ‘Properties for growing grounded theory,’ in Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K.(eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2007. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 57
  • 58.
    30 Examples • Bertram, D., Voida, A., Greenberg, S., & Walker, R., ‘Communication, collaboration, and bugs: The social nature of issue tracking in small, collocated teams. Proc CSCW 2010. • Boden, A., Nett, B., & Wulf, V., ‘Articulation work in small-scale offshore software development projects.’ Proc CHASE 2008. • Cannay, S., ‘A grounded theory investigation of patient empowerment in e-healthcare,’ Proc. AMCIS 2007. • de Souza, C.,R.B., Redmiles, D., Cheng, L.-T., Millen, D., & Patterson, J., ‘Sometimes you need to see through walls – A field study of application programmer interfaces.’ Proc CSCW 2004. • Goede, R., & de Villiers, C., ‘The applicability of grounded theory as research methodology in studies on the use of methodologies in IS practices,’ Proc. SAITSIC 2003. • Graham, C., Cheverst, K., & Rouncefield, M., ‘Technology for the humdrum: Trajectories, interactional needs and a care setting.’ Proc OZCHI 2005. • Hevner, A.R., Collins, R.W., & Garfield, M.J., ‘Product and project challenges in electronic commerce software development.’ SIGMIS Database 33(4), 2002. • Hunter, K., Hart, S., Egbu, C., & Kelly, J., ‘Grounded theory: Its diversification and application through two examples from research studies on knowledge and value management,’ Elec. J. Bus. Res. Meth. 3(1), 2005. • Kriplean, T., Beschastnikh, I., McDonald, D.W., & Golder, S.A., ‘Community, consensus, coercion, control: CS*W or how policy mediates mass participation.’ Proc GROUP 2007. • Luther, K., & Bruckman, A., ‘Leadership in online creative collaboration.’ Proc CSCW 2008i. • Mann, P., ‘Design for design: Support for creative practice in computer-supported collaborative work (CSCW) in design.’ Proc C&C 2005. • Mark, G., & Semaan, B., ‘Resilience in collaboration: Technology as a resource for new patterns of action.’ Proc CSCW 2008. • Matavire, R., & Brown, I., ‘Investigating the use of “grounded theory” in information systems research,’ Proc. SAICSIT 2008. • McConnell, D., ‘Complexity, harmony and diversity of learning in collaborative e-learning continuing professional development groups.’ Proc CSCL 2002. • McDonald, D.W., McCarthy, J.F., Soroczak, S., Nguyen, D.H., & Rashid, A.M., ‘Proactive displays: Supporting awareness in fluid social environments.’ TOCHI 14(4), 2008. • Mentis, H.M., Reddy, M., & Rosson, M.B., ‘Invisible emotion: Information and interaction in an emergency room.’ Proc CSCW 2010. • Muller, M.J., Millen, D.R., & Feinberg, J., ‘Information curators in an enterprise file-sharing service’ Proc. ECSCW 2009. • Poole, E.S., Chetty, M., Morgan, T., Grinter, R.E., & Edwards, W.K., ‘Computer help at home: Methods and motivations for informal technical support.’ Proc CHI 2009. • Redhead, F., & Brereton, M., ‘A qualitative analysis of local community communications.’ Proc OZCHI 2006. • Rode, J.A., ‘The roles that make the domestic work.’ Proc CSCW 2010. • Sarker, S., Lau, F., & Sahey, S., ‘Using an adapted grounded theory approach for inductive theory building about virtual team development,’ Data Base for Adv. Info. Sys. 32(1), 2001. • Scholl, H.J., ‘Current practices in e-government0induced business process change (BPC).’ Proc dg.04, 2004. • Selvaraj, N., & Fields, B., ‘A grounded theory approach towards conceptualizing CIS for heterogeneous work communities,’ Proc. HCI 2009. • Sousa, C.A.A., & Hendriks, P.H.J., ‘The diving bell and the butterfly: The need for grounded theory in developing a knowledge based view of organizations,’ Org. Res. Meth. 9(3), 2006. • Setlock, L.D., & Fussell, S.R., ‘What’s it worth to you? The costs and affordances of CMC tools to Asian and American Users.’ Proc CSCW 2010. • Swallow, D., Blythe, M., & Wright, P., ‘Grounding experience: Relating theory and method to evaluate the user experience of smartphones.’ Proc EACE 2005. • Thom-Santelli, J., Cosley, D., & Gay, G., ‘What’s mine is mine: Territoriality in collaborative authoring,’ Proc. CHI 2009. • Thom-Santelli, J., Muller, M.J., & Millen, D.R., ‘Social tagging roles: Publishers, evangelists, leaders,’ Proc. CHI 2008. • Weisinger, J.Y., & Salipante, P.F., ‘A grounded theory for building ethnically bridging social capital in voluntary organizations,’ Nonprofit & Vol. Sec. Quarterly 34(1), 2005. • Wilson, E.J., & Vlosky, R.P., ‘Partnering relationship activities: Building theory from case study research,’ J. Bus. Res. 39(1), 1997. Muller, IBM Research UC Irvine March 2012 58