RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

492 CONTENT ANALYSIS AND GROUNDED THEORY
theory. Grounded theory, on the other hand, does
not force data to fit with a predetermined theory
(Glaser and Strauss 1967: 3); indeed the difference
between inductive and deductive research is less
clear than it appears to be at first sight. For
example, before one can deduce, one has to
generate theory and categories inductively.
Grounded theory starts with data, which are
then analysed and reviewed to enable the theory
to be generated from them; it is rooted in the
data and little else. Here the theory derives from
the data – it is grounded in the data and emerges
from it. As Lincoln and Guba (1985: 205) argue,
grounded theory must fit the situation that is being
researched.
Glaser (1996) writes that ‘forcing methodologies
were too ascendant’, not least in positivist
research and that grounded theory had to reject
forcing or constraining the nature of a research investigation
by pre-existing theories. As grounded
theory sets aside any preconceived ideas, letting
the data themselves give rise to the theory, certain
abilities are required of the researcher, for
example:
tolerance and openness to data and what is
emerging
tolerance of confusion and regression (feeling
stupid when the theory does not become
immediately obvious)
resistance to premature formulation of theory
ability to pay close attention to data
willingness to engage in the process of theory
generation rather than theory testing; it is an
experiential methodology
ability to work with emergent categories rather
than preconceived or received categories.
As theory is not predetermined, the role of targeted
pre-reading is not as strong as in other kinds of
research (e.g. using literature reviews to generate
issues for the research), indeed it may be dangerous
as it may prematurely close off or determine what
one sees in data; it may cause one to read data
through given lenses rather than anew. As one
does not know what one will find, one cannot
be sure what one should read before undertaking
grounded theory. One should read widely, both
within and outside the field, rather than narrowly
and in too focused a direction.
There are several elements of grounded theory
that contribute to its systematic nature, and it is
to these that we now turn.
Theoretical sampling
In theoretical sampling, data are collected on an
ongoing, iterative basis, and the researcher keeps
on adding to the sample until there is enough
data to describe what is going on in the context
or situation under study and until ‘theoretical
saturation’ is reached (discussed below). As one
cannot know in advance when this point will be
reached, one cannot determine the sample size or
representativeness until one is actually doing the
research. In theoretical sampling, data collection
continues until sufficient data have been gathered
to create a theoretical explanation of what is
happening and what constitutes its key features.
It is not a question of representativeness, but,
rather, a question of allowing the theory to emerge.
Theoretical sampling, as Glaser and Strauss (1967)
write, is
the process of data collection for generating theory
whereby the analyst jointly collects, codes, and
analyses his [sic.] data and decides what data to
collect next and where to find them, in order to
develop his theory as it emerges. This process of data
collection is controlled by the emerging theory.
(Glaser and Strauss 1967: 45)
They write that ‘the basic criterion governing
the selection of comparison groups for discovering
theory is their theoretical relevance for furthering
the development of emerging categories’ (Glaser
and Strauss 1967: 49) rather than, for example,
conventional sampling strategies.
Coding
Coding is
the process of disassembling and reassembling the
data. Data are disassembled when they are broken
apart into lines, paragraphs or sections. These