Grounded Theory Method (GTM) and the Abductive Research Strategy (ARS): a critical analysis of their differences

Abstract

This paper addresses some important differences between Grounded Theory Method (GTM) and the Abductive Research Strategy (ARS). The early parts of the paper review Grounded Theory Method – both Glaser and Strauss’s (Corbin’s) Objectivist Grounded Theory Method (OGTM) and Charmaz’s Constructivist Grounded Theory Method (CGTM) – and Blaikie’s Abductive Research Strategy (ARS). It then discusses three distinctive differences between GTM (OGTM and, in particular, CGTM) and the ARS. While the first difference deals with the ontological and epistemological assumptions adopted, the second discusses the issues of scientific accounts and everyday accounts, and the third is about the problems of technical language and lay language. The aim of the paper is to reduce possible misunderstandings about the relationship between GTM, in particular, CGTM and the ARS.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 77 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.