The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Grounded Theory and Grounded Theorizing: Pragmatism in Research Practice
Abstract
Abstract The book is addressed to investigators with some knowledge of and familiarity with research methodswho are keen to learn more about the grounded theory method [GTM]. The method is located against general research issues, such as the nature of doctoral and other research, discussions on epistemology and ontology, and the initial motivations for undertaking a specific research project. The key features of GTM are discussed and exemplified using numerous examples taken from several of the author’s many successful PhD students. The focus is on distinguishing the core and essential features of the method, from those that can be regarded as “accidental.” The author’s concept of Methodological Sensitivity is introduced to explain how insightful research is often dependent on researchers’ adapting one or more methods to their specific project and context. The grounded theory method is illustrated through several examples taken from PhD theses supervised by the author; also the derivation of a grounded theory is drawn from more than 100 published GTM papers. The book includes chapters devoted to discussions of the concept of abduction and abductive logic, now seen as central to GTM, set against an overview of different forms of reasoning—i.e. induction and deduction. Other chapters include personal accounts of GTM-in-use by four successful PhD candidates and a guide that summarizes ways in which issues around GTM can be taken into account and addressed both by researchers (not only PhD students) and by assessors and evaluators (PhD examiners, journal editors, reviewers, and those refereeing research proposals).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The pursuit of quality in grounded theory
Charmaz, K., & Thornberg, R. (2021) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1780357 · Cited by 1,221
“Unlike earlier manuals describing how to do grounded theory, contemporary versions of the method including Bryant (2017, 2019), Charmaz (2006, 2014), Corbin and Strauss (2008, 2015), and Thornberg and Charmaz (2014) take a flexible approach to grounded theory and adopt more recent epistemologies.”
MethodChallenges When Using Grounded Theory
Timonen, V., Foley, G., & Conlon, C. (2018) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/1609406918758086 · Cited by 267
Iterative Thematic Inquiry: A New Method for Analyzing Qualitative Data
Morgan, D. L., & Nica, A. (2020) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/1609406920955118 · Cited by 301
Conlon, C., Timonen, V., Elliott-O’Dare, C., O’Keeffe, S., & Foley, G. (2020) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732319899139 · Cited by 220
Charmaz, K. (2020) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1077800419879081 · Cited by 248
Metadata
- Authors
- Bryant, A.
- Corresponding author
- Bryant, Antony
- ORCID
- Bryant, Antony
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2017-01-29
- OpenAlex
- W4229483819
- Cited by
- 197
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 17.31
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Keywords
- methodological sensitivity, abduction, abductive reasoning, induction and deduction, epistemology, ontology, doctoral research, research supervision, research evaluation, research proposal evaluation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Grounded Theory and Grounded Theorizing: Pragmatism in Research Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199922604.001.0001
- The paper
- Bryant, A. (2017). Grounded Theory and Grounded Theorizing: Pragmatism in Research Practice. Oxford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof%3Aoso/9780199922604.001.0001