Cited by 60Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsQualitative Research Methods and EthicsQualitative research in health

Grounded theory sampling: The contribution of reflexivity

Neill, Sarah J.·2006·Journal of Research in Nursing

Abstract

This paper explores the value of reflexivity for Glaserian grounded theory methodology, using examples drawn from experiences recruiting a sample for a doctoral research project. Reflexivity is highly relevant for grounded theory research due to its foundations in symbolic interactionism. In this study, reflexivity facilitated the identification of factors influencing sample recruitment at a process and a personal level. It provides a vehicle for the identification of the impact of self on the research relationship. Glaser’s (1978, 1992) early works situated personal experience within theoretical sensitivity, and as data to be included within constant comparative analysis method. His later writings (Glaser, 2001) explicitly reject reflexivity as a distraction from the data, seeing constant comparative analysis as having the ability to expose researcher effects on the data. He does not explore researcher influences on study recruitment. The analysis presented here suggests that the impact of the researcher at this stage of a project needs to become part of the research record(data) to ensure that its impact can be explored through constant comparative analysis. Reflectivity provides a framework through which this may be achieved.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1744987106051850

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Neill, S. J.
Affiliations
University of Northampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Neill, Sarah J.
Venue
Journal of Research in Nursing
Published
2006-05
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
253-260
ISSN
  • 1361-4096 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-9871
  • 1744-988X
OpenAlex
W2108789312
Cited by
60
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
9.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of research in nursing (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative research in health
Keywords
reflexivity, grounded theory, sample recruitment, symbolic interactionism, research relationships, doctoral research

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