Reflection on grounded theory use

Christoph Treude reflected his expereince of undertaking a grounded theory research study: "On using grounded theory in software engineering research". This is a very good post.

If Christoph is writing a journal article based on this post, writing more about two aspects will benefit readers:
  • He noted "One of the challenges is to abstract the core category to the right level." By my experience, core category will emerge and main categories get saturated at different levels in the coding process. As different research has its own design, showing code and category examples will help readers to understand what means "abstract the core category to the right level". How can we abstract a category to the righ level and how do we know it's the right level?
  • He also mentioned "After trying several tools (after all, as a Computer Science student I’d like to believe that computers can solve complex editing and annotation tasks), I gave up, printed all the data in font size 8, and went back to using pen and paper." It sounds interesting. I know some researchers didn't use qualitative data analysis software. I'm wondering what are the pros and cons between manual date analysis and software assisted data analysis. Is it only relevant to an individual's preference?
(The grounded theory ideas/discussions on Lennie Irvin’s blog are also useful for researchers. )

No comments:

Post a Comment