Choosing a methodological path: reflections on the constructivist turn

Jenna Breckenridge, Derek Jones, Ian Elliott, Margaret Nicol

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Researchers deciding to use grounded theory are faced with complex decisions regarding which method or version of grounded theory to use: Classic, straussian, feminist or constructivist grounded theory. Particularly for beginning PhD researchers, this can prove challenging given the complexities of the inherent philosophical debates and the ambiguous and conflicting use of grounded theory ‘versions’ within popular literature. The aim of this article is to demystify the differences between classic and constructivist grounded theory, presenting a critique of constructivist grounded theory that is rooted in the learning experiences of the first author as she grappled with differing perspectives during her own PhD research.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)64-71
JournalGrounded Theory Review
Volume11
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2012

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Choosing a methodological path: reflections on the constructivist turn'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this