|
4.8 Data Analysis Method- Grounded Theory
According to Bryman and Bell (2011), grounded theory is by far the most common
framework for analyzing qualitative data, and it is defined as “theory that was derived from
data, systematically gathered and analyzed through the research process.” (Bryman & Bell,
2011, p.576). Ghauri & Grønhaug (2005) discuss grounded theory as well, stating that any
type of research needs theories, both in order to make sense of the collected data and to be
able to conduct the study. A qualitative research is relatively demanding for a researcher in
2
American Academy of Management, professional association, which formulates codes of ethics.
28
regard to the fact that one should be able to observe, conceptualize and theorize. When using
grounded theory, the data collection, analysis and theories have a close relationship to each
other, and is described as an iterative approach where data collection and analysis is
repeatedly referring back to one another (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Three aspects of grounded
theory which are used in this research are
coding, theoretical saturation and constant
comparison.
The most important procedure within grounded theory is coding, where data are broken down
into different components. Simply put, codes serve as a sort of tool to label, separate, compile
and organize the data. The collected data is regarded as potential indicators of different
concepts, which constantly are compared (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Strauss and Corbin (1990)
has developed three different types of coding within grounded theory, these are
Open coding,
Axial coding
and
Selective coding.
Open coding is the “the process of breaking down,
examining, comparing, conceptualizing and categorizing data” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990,
p.61). Axial coding is “a set of procedures whereby data are put back together in new ways
after open coding, by making connections between categories” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990,
p.96). Selective coding is “the procedure of selecting the core category, systematically
relating it to other categories, validating those relationships, and filling in categories that need
further refinement and development” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p116).
As mentioned in the sampling procedure (4.6.1), all interview were recorded with notes taken.
Once the interviews were conducted, the researchers started the coding process of the
gathered material in order to find patterns. The process could be connected to open coding, as
the researchers examined, compared and categorized the gathered data in order to be able to
create the models mentioned in the analysis.
Another aspect to consider is theoretical saturation, which is divided into two different parts,
the coding of data and the collection of data. The coding of data refers to when the researcher
considers that there is no need for further investigation to see how well it fits with the
categories or concepts. Regardless of how much more data being collected, no difference will
occur. The collection of data means that the researchers has developed a concept, and may
decide to collect more data to determine the nature of it. However, the researchers might
29
eventually reach a point where the data does not irradiate the concept further and may
therefore stop the data gathering process for further investigation (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
Bryman & Bell (2011) describes constant comparison as a process of preserving the close
conjunction between the data and the research concept so the researchers indication is not
lost. The constant comparison allows the researcher to compare the coded phenomenon under
constant occasions in order for a theoretical elaboration to be raised (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
Regardless of the researchers pointing out the aim for constant comparison, the techniques
and methods remain rather unclear due to the reason that it is up to the researchers to estimate
what they consider to be relevant information for the study. It is therefore important for the
researchers conducting the study to understand the procedure in order to estimate the value of
the research (Boeije, 2002).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
