DEVELOPMENTAL CRISIS IN EARLY ADULTHOOD: A ...

Appendix E
Comparing the Interactive Model and Grounded Theory
The following two tables compare the philosophical and methodological
similarities of Miles and Huberman’s Interactive Model and Strauss and Corbin’s
approach to Grounded Theory. Each table cell gives a quote from the original
textbook that illustrates the similarity.
Table XIV – Philosophical Similarities
Interplay of
induction
and
deduction
Theoryinfluenced
research
process
Grounded Theory – Strauss and
Corbin (1998)
“The concept of induction often is
applied to qualitative research. Our
position on the matter is as follows.
Although statements of relationship
or hypotheses do evolve from data
(we go from the specific case to the
general), whenever we conceptualise
data or develop hypotheses, we are
interpreting to some degree. To us,
an interpretation is a form of
deduction. We are deducing what is
going on based on data but also based
on our reading of that data along with
our assumptions about the nature of
life, the literature we carry in our
heads, and the discussions that we
have with colleagues…In fact, there
is an interplay between induction and
deduction (as in all science).” p.136-
137
“many people mistakenly refer to
grounded theory as “inductive
theory” in order to contrast it with,
say, the theories of Parsons or Blau.
But as we have indicated, all three
aspects of inquiry (induction,
deduction, and verification) are
absolutely essential.” (Strauss, 1987,
p.12)
“Knowledge of philosophical writings
and existing theories can be useful
under certain circumstances…If the
researcher is interested in extending
an already existing theory, then he or
she might enter the field with some of
the concepts and relationships in
mind and look for how their
Interactive Model – Miles and
Huberman (1994)
“Then, too, we should not forget why we
are out in the field in the first place: to
describe and analyze a pattern of
relationships. That task requires a set of
analytic categories…Starting with them
(deductively) or getting gradually to them
(inductively) are both possible. In the life
of a conceptualisation, we need both
approaches – and may well need them
from several field researchers – to pull a
mass of facts and findings into a wideranging,
coherent set of generalizations.”
(1994, p.17)
“So induction and deduction are
dialectical, rather than mutually exclusive
research procedures. The constructivists
inductions are informed by a personal
conceptual universe; the conceptualist’s a
priori frameworks contain more empirical
data than at first meets the eye.” (1994,
p.155)
“Finally, as researchers, we do have
background knowledge. We see and
decipher details, complexities, and
subtleties that would elude a less
knowledgeable observer. We know some
questions to task, which incidents to
attend to closely, and how our theoretical
263