Different from the more common quantitative research methods, qualitative methods show a new way of thinking about academic inquiry. Qualitative approaches, although comparable in many respects, differ in some key respects, including the kind of data used (text and images), the methods used to analyze that data, and the resulting designs (Bansal et al., 2018). With that said, there are distinct approaches to think about, even within qualitative research, each of which has its own unique characteristics. For this weeks post, we are asked to discuss one of the four identified qualitative research methods (i.e., Case Study, Phenomenology, Delphi, or Grounded Theory). I chose to discuss the Grounded Theory (GT) analysis because of its unique way of extracting data. GTs approach is working from small to large, starting with the coding of the data/text line-by-line and analyzing conceptual components as they emerge, leading to preliminary theorizing using the constant comparative method (Finlay, 2021). Another unique approach to the GT analysis is its use of memoing, a data-extracting technique that, by using a written record, it considers what the researcher is thinking regarding the collected data (Miles et al., 2020). Memoing, naturally, has the potential to introduce bias into the research. However, triangulation, prolonged engagement with data, persistent observation, negative case analysis, member checks, and referential adequacy are all procedures that can be used to mitigate bias during qualitative analysis, including the Grounded Theory method (Flynn & ebrary, 2022;2021).

Comment on the post and ask question?

Please provide references