Questions: Grounded Theory Methods

Question 1

A researcher systematically codes 30 interview transcripts, groups codes into themes, writes an interpretive narrative about common patterns, and calls her method grounded theory. Which feature is most clearly missing that distinguishes grounded theory from general thematic analysis?

• A. She did not interview enough participants to justify theoretical claims
• B. She did not use approved coding software required by the Straussian tradition
• C. She lacks the constant comparison method and iterative theory-building — coding each new piece of data against emerging theory to modify categories, not just applying fixed categories to transcripts
• D. She should have reviewed all existing literature before coding to establish a proper theoretical framework

Answer: (C)

The defining features of grounded theory are: (1) constant comparison — every new datum is compared against existing codes and emerging theory, and (2) theory is built iteratively during data collection, not applied after it. Simply grouping codes into themes after collecting all data misses the iterative, data-theory dialogue that makes a theory genuinely grounded. Any systematic qualitative analysis can produce themes; only constant comparison with iterative theory revision produces grounded theory.

Question 2

A researcher reaches theoretical saturation after 12 interviews. A colleague insists this is insufficient and that grounded theory requires at least 25 interviews. The researcher's strongest reply is:

• A. The colleague is correct — published norms require at least 20-25 interviews for credible saturation claims
• B. Theoretical saturation is a conceptual criterion, not a numerical one: it is reached when new data no longer modifies or extends existing categories, regardless of the number of interviews required to reach that point
• C. Sample size requirements depend on statistical power calculations, which can justify 12 interviews under certain assumptions
• D. The researcher should continue to 25 interviews anyway to meet peer review expectations, even if categories are stable

Answer: (B)

Theoretical saturation is explicitly a conceptual stopping rule: you stop collecting data when new material produces no new categories and doesn't modify existing ones — when theory is stable. Whether that takes 8 interviews or 40 depends entirely on the phenomenon, the sampling strategy, and the complexity of the theory being built. Treating saturation as a minimum number replaces a principled conceptual criterion with an arbitrary convention — exactly the kind of procedural rigidity grounded theory was designed to avoid.

Question 3

In grounded theory, data collection and analysis proceed simultaneously rather than sequentially.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: True

This simultaneity is what enables constant comparison and theoretical sampling. As you analyze early interviews, you identify gaps and underdeveloped categories and then collect new data specifically to address them. If you wait until all data is collected before analyzing, you lose the ability to let emerging theory guide sampling — a defining feature of the method.

Question 4

Grounded theory requires researchers to approach data with no prior theoretical knowledge, concepts, or frameworks in order to achieve genuine induction.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: False

This is the strict Glaserian ideal, but it is not the consensus view. Strauss and Corbin, and later Charmaz's constructivist grounded theory, explicitly acknowledge that researchers inevitably bring prior theoretical knowledge and that coding is inherently interpretive. What matters is not tabula rasa naivety but the discipline not to prematurely force prior frameworks onto data — remaining open to categories that emerge from the data rather than confirming expectations. Pure induction from zero prior knowledge is epistemologically impossible.

Question 5

What does 'constant comparison' mean in grounded theory, and why is it essential to producing theory that is genuinely grounded?

Model answer: Constant comparison means that every new piece of data — every interview excerpt, field note, or document — is compared against existing codes, categories, and the emerging theoretical framework as analysis proceeds. Does this new data confirm a pattern? Contradict it? Require a new category? Suggest a new relationship? The resulting theory is 'grounded' because it was continuously tested and revised against incoming data, rather than derived from prior assumptions or applied after all data was collected.

Without constant comparison, a researcher can produce rich description or thematic analysis, but not theory in the grounded theory sense. The constant dialogue between data and developing theory is what produces analytical density — categories with clearly defined properties, dimensions, and relationships to other categories. It also prevents confirmation bias: if early data suggests a category but later data fails to fit it, constant comparison forces the researcher to revise rather than ignore the discrepancy.