The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Choosing between Glaser and Strauss: an example: Adeline Cooney looks at the reasons for choosing either Glaserian or Straussian grounded theory when conducting research and why she made her choice in a recent study
Abstract
Choosing between Glaserian and Straussian grounded theory when selecting a methodological approach can be challenging, but few papers consider this decision-making process. This paper explores the Glaser-Strauss debate using an example of a study which explored whether older people experience a sense of home in residential settings.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“In addition, SGT offers numerous tools to assist with data analysis, such as the coding paradigm to guide the construction of theory and the conditional/consequential matrix to elucidate broad contextual factors (Cooney, 2010; Howard‐Payne, 2016).”
From Discriminating among grounded theory approaches (2019) · cites this paper as Cooney, 2010
In the citing paper
“CGT and SGT procedures are more clearly defined than those of CGGT in the seminal texts and may be more user‐friendly for a novice researcher (Cooney, 2010).”
From Discriminating among grounded theory approaches (2019) · cites this paper as Cooney, 2010
In the citing paper
“However, the coding paradigm can also become cumbersome if it does not fit the data (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007a; Cooney, 2010; Evans, 2013).”
From Discriminating among grounded theory approaches (2019) · cites this paper as Cooney, 2010
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Discriminating among grounded theory approaches
Rieger, K. L. (2019) · Nursing Inquiry · doi:10.1111/nin.12261 · Cited by 238
Classic Grounded Theory to Analyse Secondary Data: Reality and Reflections
Andrews, L., Higgins, A., Andrews, M. W., & Lalor, J. (2012) · The grounded theory review · Cited by 91
Family–school nurse partnership in primary school health care
Mäenpää, T., Paavilainen, E., & Åstedt-Kurki, P. M. (2012) · Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.01014.x · Cited by 79
Berg, C., & Milmeister, M. (2011) · VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-531-93318-4_14 · Cited by 43
Tam, C. W. M., Zwar, N. A., & Markham, R. (2013) · BMC Family Practice · doi:10.1186/1471-2296-14-121 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Cooney, A.
- Affiliations
- Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
- Corresponding author
- Cooney, Adeline
- ORCID
- Cooney, Adeline
- Venue
- Nurse Researcher
- Publisher
- RCN Publishing Ltd.
- Published
- 2010-07
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 18-28
- ISSN
- 1351-5578 (ISSN-L)
- 2047-8992
- OpenAlex
- W2413992668
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 33.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Nurse Researcher (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
- Keywords
- grounded theory, methodological choices, sense of home, older adults, residential care, qualitative research methodology
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Humans, Inpatients, Nursing Theory, Residential Facilities
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
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.
