Cutcliffe J R
Doctoral Student, Lecturer in Mental Health Nursing and Practice Development Co-ordinator, Sheffield University, Sheffield, and RCN Institute, Oxford, England.
J Adv Nurs. 2000 Jun;31(6):1476-84. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01430.x.
Examination of the qualitative methodological literature shows that there appear to be conflicting opinions and unresolved issues regarding the nature and process of grounded theory. Researchers proposing to utilize this method would therefore be wise to consider these conflicting opinions. This paper therefore identifies and attempts to address four key issues, namely, sampling, creativity and reflexivity, the use of literature, and precision within grounded theory. The following recommendations are made. When utilizing a grounded method researchers need to consider their research question, clarify what level of theory is likely to be induced from their study, and then decide when they intend to access and introduce the second body of literature. They should acknowledge that in the early stages of data collection, some purposeful sampling appears to occur. In their search for conceptually dense theory, grounded theory researchers may wish to free themselves from the constraints that limit their use of creativity and tacit knowledge. Furthermore, the interests of researchers might be served by attention to issues of precision including, avoiding method slurring, ensuring theoretical coding occurs, and using predominantly one method of grounded theory while explaining and describing any deviation away from this chosen method. Such mindfulness and the resulting methodological rigour is likely to increase the overall quality of the inquiry and enhance the credibility of the findings.
对定性方法学文献的审视表明，关于扎根理论的性质和过程，似乎存在相互冲突的观点以及尚未解决的问题。因此，提议采用此方法的研究者明智的做法是考虑这些相互冲突的观点。本文因此识别并试图解决四个关键问题，即抽样、创造性与反思性、文献的使用以及扎根理论中的精确性。现提出以下建议。在运用扎根方法时，研究者需要考虑其研究问题，明确从其研究中可能归纳出何种理论水平，然后决定何时打算获取并引入第二批文献。他们应当认识到，在数据收集的早期阶段，似乎会进行一些有目的的抽样。在寻求概念密集型理论时，扎根理论研究者不妨从限制其创造力和隐性知识运用的束缚中解脱出来。此外，关注精确性问题可能符合研究者的利益，这些问题包括避免方法混淆、确保进行理论编码，以及在解释和描述任何偏离所选方法的情况时，主要使用一种扎根理论方法。这种审慎态度以及由此产生的方法严谨性可能会提高研究的整体质量，并增强研究结果的可信度。
