z-logo
Premium
A discussion of differences in preparation, performance and postreflections in participant observations within two grounded theory approaches
Author(s) -
Berthelsen Connie Bøttcher,
Lindhardt Tove,
Frederiksen Kirsten
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of caring sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.678
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1471-6712
pISSN - 0283-9318
DOI - 10.1111/scs.12353
Subject(s) - grounded theory , constructivist grounded theory , participant observation , data collection , qualitative research , psychology , computer science , epistemology , sociology , social science , philosophy
This paper presents a discussion of the differences in using participant observation as a data collection method by comparing the classic grounded theory methodology of Barney Glaser with the constructivist grounded theory methodology by Kathy Charmaz. Participant observations allow nursing researchers to experience activities and interactions directly in situ . However, using participant observations as a data collection method can be done in many ways, depending on the chosen grounded theory methodology, and may produce different results. This discussion shows that how the differences between using participant observations in classic and constructivist grounded theory can be considerable and that grounded theory researchers should adhere to the method descriptions of performing participant observations according to the selected grounded theory methodology to enhance the quality of research.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here