Using a synthesised technique for grounded theory in nursing research

Abstract

AIMS: To introduce a synthesised technique for using grounded theory in nursing research. BACKGROUND: Nursing increasingly uses grounded theory for a broadened perspective on nursing practice and research. Nurse researchers have choices in how to choose and use grounded theory as a research method. These choices come from a deep understanding of the different versions of grounded theory, including Glaser's classic grounded theory and Strauss and Corbin's later approach. DESIGN: Grounded theory related literature review was conducted. METHODS: This is a methodological review paper. RESULTS: Nursing researchers intent on using a grounded theory methodology should pay attention to the theoretical discussions including theoretical sampling, theoretical sensitivity, constant comparative methods and asking questions, keeping memoranda diagramming, identification of a core category and a resultant explanatory theory. A synthesised approach is developed for use, based on Strauss and Corbin's style of sampling and memoranda writing, but selecting theoretical coding families, that differ from the paradigm model of Strauss and Corbin, from the wide range suggested by Glaser. This led to the development of a multi-step synthesised approach to grounded theory data analysis based on the works of Glaser, Charmaz and Strauss and Corbin. CONCLUSIONS: The use of this synthesised approach provides a true reflection of Glaser's idea of 'emergence of theory from the data' and Strauss and Corbin's style of sampling and memoranda writing is employed. This multi-step synthesised method of data analysis maintains the philosophical perspective of grounded theory. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This method indicates how grounded theory has developed, where it might go next in nursing research and how it may continue to evolve.

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 — 83 citations exist upstream.

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