Choosing a Methodological Path: Reflections on the Constructivist Turn
Date
2012-06Author
Breckenridge, Jenna
Jones, Derek
Elliott, Ian
Nicol, Margaret
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Breckenridge, J., Jones, D., Elliott, I. & Nicol, M. (2012) Choosing a Methodological Path:
Reflections on the Constructivist Turn. The Grounded Theory Review, 11 (1), pp. 64-71.
Abstract
Researchers deciding to use grounded theory are faced with complex decisions regarding
which method or version of grounded theory to use: Classic, straussian, feminist or
constructivist grounded theory. Particularly for beginning PhD researchers, this can
prove challenging given the complexities of the inherent philosophical debates and the
ambiguous and conflicting use of grounded theory versions within popular literature.
The aim of this article is to demystify the differences between classic and constructivist
grounded theory, presenting a critique of constructivist grounded theory that is rooted in
the learning experiences of the first author as she grappled with differing perspectives
during her own PhD research.