Hi,

I have embarked on an adventure and need your help.
I am an undergraduate student trying to write a B.A. thesis. I haphazardly found my self in the world of grounded theory and now find it difficult to get out and choose another path. I have learnt so much about it in the last three months, but now I cannot move further.

I'm majoring in cultural studies with English being a second language.

Concerning my thesis, I'm combining netnography with grounded theory.

I discussed this with my supervisor. He said you are not required to do this, but you can do it if you want. He also said he cannot help.

I have settled nearly all aspects of my thesis the issues that pushed me to ask you for help.
Research questions, literature review, and data collection methods are all settled.

Concerning grounded theory, I decided to follow Charmaz's approach. I read her Constructing Grounded Theory (2006) many times.
I've almost grasped it, but the following has confused me.

Does theoretical coding mean using a theoretical framework or an external theory?
Or is it just another, but more conceptual, code?
Is theoretical coding obligatory. In other words, can I use just initial and focused coding? and use memos to develop conceptual categories (of course with theoretical sampling and sorting)?

I hope my post is not too long.

I appreciate your help.

Thank you

The information you are looking for is very specific to your field and I'm not sure that anyone on here is going to be able to assist you.

Thanks for your replies.

MeaninginLife, I appreciate your help.

I thought specifying links between categories is done through axial coding.

Since theoretical coding is somewhat cumbersome and requires learning theoretical families for which I cannot afford time, I wonder if can use Strauss and Corbin's selective coding to identify a core category (by the way, I am using Charmaz's grounded theory that does not use selective coding).

Yes. It can be simply axial coding.

The question is are you developing a relationship or theory. If theory, then use theoretical coding which is more sophisticated.
You should use Charmaz's grounded theory if your study involves finding the subjective meaning of illness, for example.

Thank you, MeaninginLife. I really appreciate your help.

In Constructing Grounded Theory, Charmaz lists four types of coding: initial, focused, axial and theoretical coding.
I have seen many PhD dissertations using Charmaz's constructivist grounded theory without using axial and theoretical coding at all. They used just initial and focused coding.

Such as the following:
1. Reframing a sense of self: a constructivist grounded theory study of children’s admission to hospital for surgery
2. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Individuals' Perceptions of Privacy and Mobile Phone Location Data: A Grounded Theory Study
3. Integrative Learning as a Development Process: A Grounded Theory of College Students'’ Experiences In Integrative Studies


Does this mean axial and theoretical coding are not important?

Thank you

a

Hello HifaMo. I followed Charmaz's approach in my thesis. I don't know if it helps but this was my interpretation:

1. Initial coding - a wide-ranging set of codes emerge from a detailed analysis.
2. Focused coding - initial codes are synthesised into main conceptual categories. At this point I re-read the material with my list of codes to identify where they could be grouped as well as and cross-cutting ideas.
3. Theoretical coding - refining the focused codes into thematic categories that form a coherent story. At this point I wove in some themes from the literature because I saw some connections, but importantly this shouldn't be done the other way around (i.e. theoretical coding starting from themes from the literature) and might not necessarily happen at all if your theoretical codes don't echo the literature.

I accompanied this with a table detailing the progression of the codes from initial to focused to theoretical.

I wanted to avoid axial coding - too prescriptive for my needs. Charmaz's approach allows more flexibility/creativity. I think it's really important to adopt an approach that feels natural rather than forcing your methods into a framework that doesn't fit the material you're working with or the goals of your study.

I'd be careful about saying you're using grounded theory unless you're accompanying this with a discussion to show you understand the differences between the approaches and a justification for following Charmaz's method. Saying you're taking a "grounded approach" to your netnographic analysis might be more appropriate/forgiving.

I don’t have Charmaz’s book to hand and didn't explain myself very well. If you’ve read it several times you’ll have a much better understanding than me and her approach was something I drew on rather than followed to the letter. My reading was that theoretical coding is about looking for relationships between the categories, coding families help to identify the relationships, and the overall goal is refinement and analytic sense.