Singh Shaminder, Estefan Andrew
University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2018 Oct 4;5:2333393618799571. doi: 10.1177/2333393618799571. eCollection 2018 Jan-Dec.
Grounded theory is a commonly used research methodology. There are three primary approaches to grounded theory in nursing research: those espoused by Glaser, Strauss and Corbin, and Charmaz. All three approaches use similar procedures, yet there are important differences among them, which implies that researchers need to make careful choices when using grounded theory. Researchers new to grounded theory need to find the most appropriate approach that fits their research field, topic, and researcher position. In this article, we compare the three grounded theory approaches. Choices of a grounded theory approach will depend on the researcher's understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of all three approaches. Practical aspects of grounded theory approaches should match the information processing styles and analytical abilities of the researcher and the intended use of the theory. We illustrate key aspects of decision making about which method to select by drawing upon the first author's experiences in his doctoral research.
扎根理论是一种常用的研究方法。在护理研究中，扎根理论主要有三种方法：格拉斯尔、施特劳斯和科宾以及查马兹所倡导的方法。这三种方法都采用类似的程序，但它们之间存在重要差异，这意味着研究人员在使用扎根理论时需要谨慎选择。刚接触扎根理论的研究人员需要找到最适合其研究领域、主题和研究人员立场的方法。在本文中，我们比较了三种扎根理论方法。扎根理论方法的选择将取决于研究人员对这三种方法哲学基础的理解。扎根理论方法的实际方面应与研究人员的信息处理方式、分析能力以及该理论的预期用途相匹配。我们通过借鉴第一作者在其博士研究中的经验，阐述了选择哪种方法的决策关键方面。
