Grounded theory research: literature reviewing and reflexivity
Grounded theory research: literature reviewing and reflexivity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04436.x
复制
发表时间：
2007-11-01
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Atkinson, Jacqueline
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McGhee, Gerry;Marland, Glenn R.;Atkinson, Jacqueline
瞄准本文是一份关于扎根理论中初始文献综述的作用的讨论报告。背景。新的扎根理论的研究人员可能会发现自己对文献综述感到困惑，这是我们自己经历过的事情，指出需要明确在扎根理论中使用文献，以帮助指导其他人开始类似的研究之旅。支持和反对使用大量的主题相关的初步文献综述在扎根理论研究的论点进行了讨论，从我们自己的研究给出的例子。使用理论上抽样的文献和必要性的自反性进行了讨论。反身性被视为明确的追求，以限制研究人员的影响，对数据的自我意识，被视为不可或缺的数据收集过程和不断比较的方法，扎根理论。一个接近该领域的研究人员可能已经在理论上敏感，并熟悉有关研究主题的文献。使用文献或任何其他先验知识不应妨碍从归纳-演绎相互作用中产生的基础理论，这是这种方法的核心。自反性是必要的，以防止先前的知识扭曲研究人员的看法的数据。
Aim. This paper is a report of a discussion of the arguments surrounding the role of the initial literature review in grounded theory.Background. Researchers new to grounded theory may find themselves confused about the literature review, something we ourselves experienced, pointing to the need for clarity about use of the literature in grounded theory to help guide others about to embark on similar research journeys.Discussion. The arguments for and against the use of a substantial topic-related initial literature review in a grounded theory study are discussed, giving examples from our own studies. The use of theoretically sampled literature and the necessity for reflexivity are also discussed. Reflexivity is viewed as the explicit quest to limit researcher effects on the data by awareness of self, something seen as integral both to the process of data collection and the constant comparison method essential to grounded theory.Conclusion. A researcher who is close to the field may already be theoretically sensitized and familiar with the literature on the study topic. Use of literature or any other preknowledge should not prevent a grounded theory arising from the inductive-deductive interplay which is at the heart of this method. Reflexivity is needed to prevent prior knowledge distorting the researcher's perceptions of the data.