The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing qualitative research methodologies for systemic research: the use of grounded theory, discourse analysis and narrative analysis
Abstract
Many of the qualitative research methods developed in the social sciences are well suited to explore research questions pertinent for the systemic field, and make a good fit with systemic thinking. In this paper I briefly outline the value of qualitative research for systemic psychotherapies. I explore some parallel developments in the field of qualitative research and systemic therapy which can inform each other. Three qualitative methodologies, a grounded theory approach, discourse analysis and narrative analysis, particularly useful for the research of subjective experience and meaning, are briefly outlined. To compare and contrast these methodologies, I discuss their application to a pilot study concerning the experiences of living life in more than one language. I demonstrate how each research methodology can highlight different aspects of qualitative research material and address different research questions. The challenge of how these methodologies may be further developed for systemic research is posed.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
(1994) · Cited by 13,126
Handbook of Qualitative Research.
DeVault, M. L., Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1995) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2076551 · Cited by 6,282
(1990) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 5,835
Positioning: The Discursive Production of Selves
DAVIES, B., & HARRÉ, R. (1990) · Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour · doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00174.x · Cited by 5,357
Goulding, C. (2002) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781849209236 · Cited by 4,455
38. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory
MacIntyre, A. (2016) · Essays and Reviews · doi:10.1515/9781400848393-039 · Cited by 3,326
An Introduction to Social Constructionism
Burr, V. (1995) · Taylor & Francis eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203299968 · Cited by 3,286
Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular
Burling, R., & Labov, W. (1975) · Language · doi:10.2307/412879 · Cited by 3,019
Metadata
- Authors
- Burck, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Family Therapy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-08
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 237-262
- ISSN
- 0163-4445 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6427
- OpenAlex
- W2115783839
- Cited by
- 320
- References
- 58
- FWCI
- 34.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Comparing qualitative research methodologies for systemic research: the use of grounded theory, discourse analysis and narrative analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-6427.2005.00314.x
- The paper
- Burck, C. (2005). Comparing qualitative research methodologies for systemic research: the use of grounded theory, discourse analysis and narrative analysis. Journal of Family Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6427.2005.00314.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.