GT | Grounded Theory | Qualitative Research Method

注：机翻，未校。

---

What is grounded theory?

1. Helen Noble 1,

2. Gary Mitchell 2

3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queens’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK

4. Four Seasons Health Care, Belfast, UK

5. Correspondence to : Dr Helen Noble , School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queens’s University Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK; Helen.noble@qub.ac.uk

Introduction 介绍

Grounded theory (GT) is a research method concerned with the generation of theory,1 which is ‘grounded’ in data that has been systematically collected and analysed.2 It is used to uncover such things as social relationships and behaviours of groups, known as social processes.3 It was developed in California, USA by Glaser and Strauss during their study—‘Awareness of Dying’.1 It is a general methodology for developing theory that is grounded in data which is systematically gathered and analysed.
扎根理论 （GT） 是一种涉及理论生成的研究方法，它“以”系统收集和分析的数据为基础。它用于揭示社会关系和群体行为等事物，称为社会过程。它是由格拉泽和施特劳斯在美国加利福尼亚的“死亡意识”研究中开发的。它是发展基于数据的理论的通用方法，其中被系统地收集和分析。

Features of GT

GT 的特点

• Data collection and analysis occur simultaneously.
  数据收集和分析同时进行。
• Categories and analytic codes developed from data. Pre-existing conceptualisations not to be used—this is known as theoretical sensitivity (see below).
  根据数据开发的类别和分析代码。不应使用预先存在的概念化——这被称为理论敏感性（见下文）。
• Theoretical sampling used to refine categories.
  用于优化类别的理论抽样。
• Abstract categories constructed inductively.
  归纳构建的抽象类别。
• Social processes discovered in the data.
  在数据中发现的社交流程。
• Analytical memos used between coding and writing.
  在编码和编写之间使用的分析备忘录。
• Categories integrated into a theoretical framework.4
  类别整合到理论框架中。

Carrying out a GT study

执行 GT 研究

First the area of interest is identified. Theoretical preconceptions should be avoided, although it is accepted this is difficult in practice. Analytical procedures and sampling strategies are then used and the study is finished when theoretical sampling reached5 all discussed below. Data collected may be qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both. Data collection methods often include in-depth interviews using open-ended questions. Questions can be adjusted as theory emerges. Observational methods and focus groups may also be used.
首先确定感兴趣的区域。应该避免理论上的先入之见，尽管人们认为这在实践中是困难的。然后使用分析程序和抽样策略，当理论抽样达到 时，研究结束，如下所述。收集的数据可以是定性的或定量的，也可以是两者的组合。数据收集方法通常包括使用开放式问题的深入访谈。问题可以随着理论的出现而调整。也可以使用观察方法和焦点小组。

Theoretical sampling

理论抽样

Glaser and Strauss (1967) first mentioned theoretical sampling and described a process of generating theory from data which includes collecting the data, then coding and analysing the data.1 Next the researcher makes a conscious decision about what further detail they feel needs exploring as the new theory develops. It usually takes place after some initial key concepts or categories have been identified, for example, you might decide to interview patients about their experience of heart failure. They may talk about systematic errors occurring in the general practice surgery. From this analysis of the data you may decide to approach and interview GPs to explore their views on patients’ comments. Theoretical sampling therefore, is used to produce more data to endorse or refute the categories that have been identified in the previous analysis.6
Glaser 和 Strauss （1967） 首先提到了理论抽样，并描述了从数据中生成理论的过程，包括收集数据，然后对数据进行编码和分析。接下来，研究人员有意识地决定，随着新理论的发展，他们认为需要探索哪些进一步的细节。它通常在确定一些初始关键概念或类别后进行，例如，您可能决定采访患者以了解他们的心力衰竭经历。他们可能会谈论全科手术中发生的系统性错误。根据对数据的分析，您可以决定联系和采访全科医生，以探索他们对患者评论的看法。因此，理论抽样用于产生更多数据，以支持或反驳先前分析中已确定的类别。

Theoretical sensitivity 理论灵敏度

Theoretical sensitivity refers to the insight of the researcher. It concerns the researcher being able to give meaning to data, understand what the data says, and being able to separate out what is relevant and what is not. By being theoretically sensitive and using insight, the researcher is able to develop a theory that is grounded, theoretically dense, and cohesive.7 Sensitivity comes from several sources including (1) literature—in depth reading offers a rich understanding of the phenomena being studied; (2) professional and personal experience—offers an understanding of the events and topics being explored; (3) the analytic process—allows for insight and understanding of the phenomena.8
理论敏感性是指研究人员的洞察力。它涉及研究人员能够赋予数据意义，理解数据的内容，并能够区分什么是相关的，什么是不相关的。通过保持理论敏感性和洞察力，研究人员能够发展出一个扎实、理论密集和有凝聚力的理论。敏感性来自多个来源，包括 （1） 文献——深度阅读提供了对所研究现象的丰富理解;（2） 专业和个人经验 — 提供对正在探索的事件和主题的理解;（3） 分析过程 — 允许对现象的洞察力和理解。

Analysis of data in GT GT 中的数据分析

There are three stages of data analysis in GT:[8]
GT：8 的数据分析分为三个阶段

1. Open coding: this involves line by line coding where concepts and key phrases are identified and highlighted and moved into subcategories, then categories. This breaks the data down into conceptual components and the researcher can start to theorise or reflect on what they are reading and understanding—making sense of the data. The data from each participant will be ‘constantly compared’ for similarities.
   开放编码：这涉及逐行编码，其中概念和关键短语被识别并突出显示，然后移动到子类别中，然后是类别。这将数据分解为概念组成部分，研究人员可以开始理论化或反思他们正在阅读和理解的内容——理解数据。来自每个参与者的数据将被“不断比较”以寻找相似性。
2. Axial coding: at this stage relationships are identified between the categories, and connections identified.
   轴向编码：在此阶段，确定类别之间的关系，并确定连接。
3. Selective coding: this involves identifying the core category and methodically relating it to other categories. The relationships must be authenticated and categories refined. Categories are then integrated together and a GT identified.
   选择性编码：这涉及识别核心类别并有条不紊地将其与其他类别相关联。必须对关系进行身份验证并优化类别。然后将类别整合在一起并确定 GT。

Analytical notes are encouraged. These are notes to oneself to explain thought patterns in relation to the data analysis. Final theory is usually generated from the integration of several analytical memos.
鼓励分析性笔记。这些是给自己的笔记，用于解释与数据分析相关的思维模式。最终理论通常是由几个分析备忘录的集成产生的。

The core category 核心品类

The core category is the chief phenomena around which the categories are built. Theory is generated around a core category. The core category should account for the variation found in the data, that is, the categories will relate to it in some way. The categories demonstrate how the core category is situated in the lives of those participating in the study.
核心类别是构建类别的主要现象。理论是围绕一个核心类别产生的。核心类别应考虑在数据中发现的变体，也就是说，类别将以某种方式与之相关。这些类别展示了核心类别在参与研究的人的生活中的位置。

Example of a GT case study GT 案例研究示例

As illustrated, GT methodologies involve the construction of new theory through the analysis of data. In a study carried out by Beech et al,9 the authors sought to explore patient participant experiences of recovery following surgical intervention for colorectal cancer. Beech et al9 opted to use GT because previous studies had sought to answer this research question by measuring quantifiable biomedical markers, such as symptoms of pain, insomnia or fatigue. According to the authors, there was a paucity of empirical literature around the topic from a holistic perspective, for example social, psychological and cultural aspects of a person’s well-being.
如图所示，GT 方法涉及通过数据分析构建新理论。在 Beech 等人进行的一项研究中，作者试图探索患者参与者在结直肠癌手术干预后恢复的经历。Beech 等人选择使用 GT，因为以前的研究试图通过测量可量化的生物医学标志物（例如疼痛、失眠或疲劳症状）来回答这一研究问题。据作者称，从整体角度围绕该主题缺乏实证文献，例如一个人幸福感的社会、心理和文化方面。

Twelve participants were interviewed four times, over a 1-year period. The authors used theoretical sampling to guide the researcher as data were collected. It helped facilitate the development of theory as it emerged, not once data collection was complete.1 Initial participants were selected based on ‘subject area’, as is recommended in theoretical sampling. Each had undergone a surgical procedure to remove a tumour in their bowel or rectum and had not received prescribed chemotherapy or radiotherapy. The authors initially asked patient participants to describe their experiences to date.
12 名参与者在 1 年内接受了 4 次访谈。作者在收集数据时使用理论抽样来指导研究人员。它有助于促进理论的发展，而不是在数据收集完成后。最初的参与者是根据“学科领域”选择的，正如理论抽样中所建议的那样。每个人都接受了切除肠道或直肠肿瘤的外科手术，并且没有接受规定的化疗或放疗。作者最初要求患者参与者描述他们迄今为止的经历。

Data analysis of the interviews was carried out according to the steps described by Strauss and Corbin.10 The authors began by coding each line of each patient participant transcript. Similar codes were then grouped together to form subcategories and within these subcategories categories were identified. The authors then grouped together the categories to form theory related to patient participant experiences of recovery following surgical intervention for colorectal cancer. The process of data collection continued until each category was saturated and no new data emerged.
根据 Strauss 和 Corbin 描述的步骤对访谈进行数据分析作者首先对每个患者参与者转录的每一行进行编码。然后将相似的代码组合在一起形成子类别，并在这些子类别中确定类别。然后，作者将这些类别组合在一起，形成与结直肠癌手术干预后患者参与者恢复体验相关的理论。数据收集过程一直持续到每个类别都饱和并且没有新数据出现。

Patient participants described their recovery in three phases identified from three categories; disrupting the self, repairing the self and restoring the self. The authors also noted how the process was linear in that all participants went through the stages, for example, phase one began at prediagnosis and ended at the conclusion of surgery; phase two commonly lasted between 3 and 6 months and phase three, from 6 months onwards, was related to a person’s fluctuating level of wellness and illness. Notably, these three categories were underpinned by various subcategories, which were generated from initial codes. For example, the second category Beech et al4 identified, ‘disrupting the self’, was made up of the three subcategories; body repair, autonomy and re-establishing personal identity (figure 1).
患者参与者描述了他们的康复分为三个阶段，这些阶段分为三个类别;破坏自我，修复自我，恢复自我。作者还指出，该过程是线性的，因为所有参与者都经历了各个阶段，例如，第一阶段从诊断前开始，到手术结束时结束;第二阶段通常持续 3 到 6 个月，第三阶段从 6 个月开始，与一个人的健康和疾病水平波动有关。值得注意的是，这三个类别由各种子类别支撑，这些子类别是从初始代码生成的。例如，Beech 等人4 确定的第二个类别，“破坏自我”，由三个子类别组成;身体修复、自主性和重新建立个人身份（图 1）。

Figure 1

Grounded theory data analysis.
扎根理论数据分析。

Importantly, the authors encapsulated the three categories to present a pertinent theory related to patient participant experiences of recovery following surgical intervention for colorectal cancer. They found that recovery is more than physical repair. It is a process of restoring a sense of wellness demonstrated through an awareness and enjoyment of the physical, emotional, social and spiritual aspects of life, in other words, holistic health.9
重要的是，作者将这三个类别概括在一起，提出了与患者参与者在结直肠癌手术干预后恢复经验相关的相关理论。他们发现，恢复不仅仅是物理修复。这是一个恢复健康感的过程，通过对生活的身体、情感、社交和精神方面的认识和享受，换句话说，整体健康来体现。

Summary 总结

By using GT and adhering to this as a research method, a theory will be produced that is grounded in your data.10 It is a research method which uses strict procedures for data analysis and will enable you to search for and conceptualise the hidden social and collective patterns and constructions in your area of interest.
通过使用 GT 并坚持将其作为一种研究方法，将产生一个基于您的数据的理论.这是一种使用严格程序进行数据分析的研究方法，使您能够搜索和概念化您感兴趣的领域中隐藏的社会和集体模式和结构。

References

1. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1967.

2. Strauss A, Corbin J. Grounded theory methodology: an overview. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications, 1994:1–18.

3. Crooks DL. The importance of symbolic interaction in grounded theory research on women’s health. Health Care for Women International, 2001;22:11–27.

4. Charmaz K. “Grounded theory”. In: Smith J, et al. eds. Rethinking methods in psychology. London: Sage, 1995:27–49.

5. Dey I. Grounding Grounded Theory Guidelines for Qualitative Inquiry, San Diego: Academic Press, 1990.

6. Charmaz K. “Discovering” chronic illness: Using grounded theory Social Science and Medicine 1990;30:1161–72.

7. Glaser B. Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press, 1978.

8. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, 1990.

9. Beech N, Arber A, Faithfull S. Restoring a sense of wellness following colorectal cancer: a grounded theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2012;68:1134–44. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05820.x

10. Strauss A, Corbin J. Grounded theory methodology: an overview. In: Denzin N, Lincoln Y, eds. Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1998:158–83.

---

注：机翻，未校。

---

10 Grounded Theory Examples (Qualitative Research Method)

10 个扎根理论示例（定性研究方法）

Written by Chris Drew (PhD)
October 26, 2023

Grounded theory is a qualitative research method. that involves the construction of theory from data rather than testing theories through data (Birks & Mills, 2015).
扎根理论是一种定性研究方法，涉及从数据构建理论，而不是通过数据测试理论（Birks & Mills，2015）。

In other words, a grounded theory analysis doesn’t start with a hypothesis or theoretical framework, but instead generates a theory during the data analysis process..
换句话说，扎根理论分析不是从假设或理论框架开始，而是在数据分析过程中产生理论。

This method has garnered a notable amount of attention since its inception in the 1960s by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss (Corbin & Strauss, 2015).
自1960年代由Barney Glaser和Anselm Strauss创立以来，这种方法已经引起了显著的关注，Corbin & Strauss，2015）。

Contents show .

Grounded Theory Definition and Overview

扎根理论定义和概述

A central feature of grounded theory is the continuous interplay between data collection and analysis (Bringer, Johnston, & Brackenridge, 2016).
扎根理论的一个核心特点是数据收集和分析之间的持续相互作用（Bringer， Johnston， & Brackenridge， 2016）。

Grounded theorists start with the data, coding and considering each piece of collected information (for instance, behaviors collected during a psychological study).
扎根的理论家从数据开始，编码并考虑收集到的每条信息（例如，在心理学研究期间收集的行为）。

As more information is collected, the researcher can reflect upon the data in an ongoing cycle where data informs an ever-growing and evolving theory (Mills, Bonner & Francis, 2017).
随着收集到更多信息，研究人员可以在一个持续的周期中反思数据，其中数据为不断增长和演变的理论提供信息（Mills， Bonner & Francis， 2017）。

As such, the researcher isn’t tied to testing a hypothesis, but instead, can allow surprising and intriguing insights to emerge from the data itself.
因此，研究人员并不局限于检验假设，而是可以从数据本身中得出令人惊讶和有趣的见解。

Applications of grounded theory are widespread within the field of social sciences. The method has been utilized to provide insight into complex social phenomena such as nursing, education, and business management (Atkinson, 2015).
扎根理论的应用在社会科学领域内很广泛。该方法已被用于提供对复杂社会现象的洞察，例如护理、教育和商业管理（Atkinson，2015 年）。

Grounded theory offers a sound methodology to unearth the complexities of social phenomena that aren’t well-understood in existing theories (McGhee, Marland & Atkinson, 2017).
扎根理论提供了一种合理的方法来挖掘现有理论中未被充分理解的社会现象的复杂性（McGhee， Marland & Atkinson， 2017）。

While the methods of grounded theory can be labor-intensive and time-consuming, the rich, robust theories this approach produces make it a valuable tool in many researchers’ repertoires.
虽然扎根理论的方法可能既费力又费时，但这种方法产生的丰富、稳健的理论使其成为许多研究人员的宝贵工具。

Real-Life Grounded Theory Examples

现实生活中的扎根理论示例

Title: A grounded theory analysis of older adults and information technology
题目：老年人和信息技术的扎根理论分析

Citation: Weatherall, J. W. A. (2000). A grounded theory analysis of older adults and information technology. Educational Gerontology, 26(4), 371-386.
引自：Weatherall， J. W. A. （2000）。老年人和信息技术的扎根理论分析。教育老年学，26（4），371-386。

Description: This study employed a grounded theory approach to investigate older adults’ use of information technology (IT). Six participants from a senior senior were interviewed about their experiences and opinions regarding computer technology. Consistent with a grounded theory angle, there was no hypothesis to be tested. Rather, themes emerged out of the analysis process. From this, the findings revealed that the participants recognized the importance of IT in modern life, which motivated them to explore its potential. Positive attitudes towards IT were developed and reinforced through direct experience and personal ownership of technology.
描述： 本研究采用扎根理论方法来调查老年人对信息技术 （IT） 的使用情况。来自一位高级高级的六名参与者接受了采访，了解他们对计算机技术的经验和看法。与扎根理论角度一致，没有需要检验的假设。相反，主题是从分析过程中产生的。由此，研究结果显示，参与者认识到 IT 在现代生活中的重要性，这促使他们探索其潜力。通过直接经验和个人对技术的所有权，培养和加强了对 IT 的积极态度。

Title: A taxonomy of dignity: a grounded theory study
标题： 尊严的分类法：扎根理论研究

Citation: Jacobson, N. (2009). A taxonomy of dignity: a grounded theory study. BMC International health and human rights, 9(1), 1-9.
引自：Jacobson， N. （2009）。尊严的分类法：扎根的理论研究。BMC 国际健康与人权，9（1），1-9。

Description: This study aims to develop a taxonomy of dignity by letting the data create the taxonomic categories, rather than imposing the categories upon the analysis. The theory emerged from the textual and thematic analysis of 64 interviews conducted with individuals marginalized by health or social status, as well as those providing services to such populations and professionals working in health and human rights. This approach identified two main forms of dignity that emerged out of the data: “human dignity” and “social dignity”.
描述： 本研究旨在通过让数据创建分类类别，而不是将类别强加于分析来开发尊严分类法。该理论源于对 64 次访谈的文本和主题分析，这些访谈针对因健康或社会地位而被边缘化的个人，以及为此类人群提供服务的人和从事健康和人权工作的专业人士。这种方法确定了数据中出现的两种主要形式的尊严：“人的尊严”和“社会尊严”。

Title: A grounded theory of the development of noble youth purpose
题目：高尚青年目标发展的扎根理论

Citation: Bronk, K. C. (2012). A grounded theory of the development of noble youth purpose. Journal of Adolescent Research, 27(1), 78-109.
引自：Bronk， KC （2012）。关于高尚青年目标发展的扎实理论。青少年研究杂志，27（1），78-109。

Description: This study explores the development of noble youth purpose over time using a grounded theory approach. Something notable about this study was that it returned to collect additional data two additional times, demonstrating how grounded theory can be an interactive process. The researchers conducted three waves of interviews with nine adolescents who demonstrated strong commitments to various noble purposes. The findings revealed that commitments grew slowly but steadily in response to positive feedback, with mentors and like-minded peers playing a crucial role in supporting noble purposes.
描述： 本研究使用扎根理论方法探讨了高尚青年目标随着时间的推移而发展。这项研究值得注意的一点是，它又两次返回收集额外的数据，展示了扎根理论如何是一个互动过程。研究人员对 9 名青少年进行了三波访谈，他们表现出对各种崇高目标的强烈承诺。研究结果显示，对积极反馈的响应，承诺缓慢但稳定地增长，导师和志同道合的同龄人在支持崇高目标方面发挥着至关重要的作用。

Title: A grounded theory of the flow experiences of Web users
标题：Web 用户心流体验的扎根理论

Citation: Pace, S. (2004). A grounded theory of the flow experiences of Web users. International journal of human-computer studies, 60(3), 327-363.
引自：Pace， S. （2004）。Web 用户心流体验的扎根理论。国际人机研究杂志，60（3），327-363。

Description: This study attempted to understand the flow experiences of web users engaged in information-seeking activities, systematically gathering and analyzing data from semi-structured in-depth interviews with web users. By avoiding preconceptions and reviewing the literature only after the theory had emerged, the study aimed to develop a theory based on the data rather than testing preconceived ideas. The study identified key elements of flow experiences, such as the balance between challenges and skills, clear goals and feedback, concentration, a sense of control, a distorted sense of time, and the autotelic experience.
描述： 本研究试图了解参与信息搜索活动的网络用户的心流体验，系统地收集和分析与网络用户的半结构化深度访谈中的数据。通过避免先入为主的观念，只在理论出现后才回顾文献，该研究旨在根据数据发展一种理论，而不是检验先入为主的想法。该研究确定了心流体验的关键要素，例如挑战和技能之间的平衡、明确的目标和反馈、专注力、控制感、扭曲的时间感和自主体验。

Title: Victimising of school bullying: a grounded theory.
标题：校园欺凌的受害者：一个扎根的理论

Citation: Thornberg, R., Halldin, K., Bolmsjö, N., & Petersson, A. (2013). Victimising of school bullying: A grounded theory. Research Papers in Education, 28(3), 309-329.
引自:Thornberg, R., Halldin, K., Bolmsjö, N., & Petersson, A. (2013)｡
校园欺凌的受害者:一个扎实的理论｡ 教育研究论文,28(3),309-329｡

Description: This study aimed to investigate the experiences of individuals who had been victims of school bullying and understand the effects of these experiences, using a grounded theory approach. Through iterative coding of interviews, the researchers identify themes from the data without a pre-conceived idea or hypothesis that they aim to test. The open-minded coding of the data led to the identification of a four-phase process in victimizing: initial attacks, double victimizing, bullying exit, and after-effects of bullying. The study highlighted the social processes. involved in victimizing, including external victimizing through stigmatization and social exclusion, as well as internal victimizing through self-isolation, self-doubt, and lingering psychosocial issues.
描述： 本研究旨在使用扎根理论方法调查校园欺凌受害者的经历，并了解这些经历的影响。通过访谈的迭代编码，研究人员从数据中识别主题，而无需他们旨在测试的先入为主的想法或假设。对数据进行开放的编码导致确定了受害的四个阶段过程：初始攻击、双重受害、欺凌退出和欺凌的后遗症。该研究强调了受害所涉及的社会过程，包括通过污名化和社会排斥实现的外部受害，以及通过自我孤立、自我怀疑和挥之不去的社会心理问题造成的内部受害。

Hypothetical Grounded Theory Examples

假设扎根理论示例

Suggested Title: “Understanding Interprofessional Collaboration in Emergency Medical Services”
建议标题： “了解紧急医疗服务中的跨专业合作”

Suggested Data Analysis Method: Coding and constant comparative analysis
建议的数据分析方法：编码和常数比较分析

How to Do It: This hypothetical study might begin with conducting in-depth interviews and field observations within several emergency medical teams to collect detailed narratives and behaviors. Multiple rounds of coding and categorizing would be carried out on this raw data, consistently comparing new information with existing categories. As the categories saturate, relationships among them would be identified, with these relationships forming the basis of a new theory bettering our understanding of collaboration in emergency settings. This iterative process of data collection, analysis, and theory development, continually refined based on fresh insights, upholds the essence of a grounded theory approach.
怎么做： 这项假设的研究可能从在几个紧急医疗队内进行深入访谈和实地观察开始，以收集详细的叙述和行为。将对这些原始数据进行多轮编码和分类，始终将新信息与现有类别进行比较。随着类别的饱和，它们之间的关系将被识别出来，这些关系构成了一种新理论的基础，该理论可以更好地理解紧急情况下的协作。这个数据收集、分析和理论开发的迭代过程，根据新的见解不断完善，坚持了扎根理论方法的精髓。

Suggested Title: “The Role of Social Media in Political Engagement Among Young Adults”
建议标题：“社交媒体在年轻人政治参与中的作用”

Suggested Data Analysis Method: Open, axial, and selective coding
建议的数据分析方法：开放、轴向和选择性编码

Explanation: The study would start by collecting interaction data on various social media platforms, focusing on political discussions engaged in by young adults. Through open, axial, and selective coding, the data would be broken down, compared, and conceptualized. New insights and patterns would gradually form the basis of a theory explaining the role of social media in shaping political engagement, with continuous refinement informed by the gathered data. This process embodies the recursive essence of the grounded theory approach.
解释：该研究将从收集各种社交媒体平台上的互动数据开始，重点关注年轻人参与的政治讨论。通过开放、轴向和选择性编码，数据将被分解、比较和概念化。新的见解和模式将逐渐形成解释社交媒体在塑造政治参与中的作用的理论基础，并根据收集的数据不断完善。这个过程体现了扎根理论方法的递归本质。

Suggested Title: “Transforming Workplace Cultures: An Exploration of Remote Work Trends”
推荐标题： “转变工作场所文化：远程工作趋势探索”

Suggested Data Analysis Method: Constant comparative analysis
建议的数据分析方法：常数比较分析

Explanation: The theoretical study could leverage survey data and in-depth interviews of employees and bosses engaging in remote work to understand the shifts in workplace culture. Coding and constant comparative analysis would enable the identification of core categories and relationships among them. Sustainability and resilience through remote ways of working would be emergent themes. This constant back-and-forth interplay between data collection, analysis, and theory formation aligns strongly with a grounded theory approach.
解释： 该理论研究可以利用调查数据和对从事远程工作的员工和老板的深入访谈来了解工作场所文化的转变。编码和不断的比较分析将能够识别核心类别和它们之间的关系。通过远程工作方式实现可持续性和弹性将成为新兴主题。数据收集、分析和理论形成之间的这种不断的来回相互作用与扎根理论方法密切相关。

Suggested Title: “Persistence Amidst Challenges: A Grounded Theory Approach to Understanding Resilience in Urban Educators”
建议标题：“挑战中的坚持：理解城市教育工作者韧性的扎根理论方法”

Suggested Data Analysis Method: Iterative Coding
建议的数据分析方法：迭代编码

How to Do It: This study would involve collecting data via interviews from educators in urban school systems. Through iterative coding, data would be constantly analyzed, compared, and categorized to derive meaningful theories about resilience. The researcher would constantly return to the data, refining the developing theory with every successive interaction. This procedure organically incorporates the grounded theory approach’s characteristic iterative nature.
怎么做： 这项研究将涉及通过对城市学校系统的教育工作者的采访来收集数据。通过迭代编码，数据将不断被分析、比较和分类，以得出关于弹性的有意义的理论。研究人员会不断地回到数据中，通过每一次连续的互动来完善发展中的理论。该程序有机地结合了扎根理论方法的特征迭代性质。

Suggested Title: “Coping Strategies of Patients with Chronic Pain: A Grounded Theory Study”
建议标题： “慢性疼痛患者的应对策略：一项扎根理论研究”

Suggested Data Analysis Method: Line-by-line inductive coding.
建议的数据分析方法：逐行感应编码

How to Do It: The study might initiate with in-depth interviews of patients who’ve experienced chronic pain. Line-by-line coding, followed by memoing, helps to immerse oneself in the data, utilizing a grounded theory approach to map out the relationships between categories and their properties. New rounds of interviews would supplement and refine the emergent theory further. The subsequent theory would then be a detailed, data-grounded exploration of how patients cope with chronic pain.
怎么做： 该研究可能会从对经历过慢性疼痛的患者进行深入访谈开始。逐行编码，然后是记忆，有助于让自己沉浸在数据中，利用扎根的理论方法来绘制类别及其属性之间的关系。新一轮的访谈将进一步补充和完善涌现理论。然后，随后的理论将是对患者如何应对慢性疼痛的详细、基于数据的探索。

Conclusion

结论

Grounded theory is an innovative way to gather qualitative data that can help introduce new thoughts, theories, and ideas into academic literature. While it has its strength in allowing the “data to do the talking”, it also has some key limitations – namely, often, it leads to results that have already been found in the academic literature. Studies that try to build upon current knowledge by testing new hypotheses are, in general, more laser-focused on ensuring we push current knowledge forward. Nevertheless, a grounded theory approach is very useful in many circumstances, revealing important new information that may not be generated through other approaches. So, overall, this methodology has great value for qualitative researchers, and can be extremely useful, especially when exploring specific case study projects. I also find it to synthesize well with action research projects.
扎根理论是一种收集定性数据的创新方式，可以帮助将新思想、理论和想法引入学术文献。虽然它在允许 “数据说话” 方面有其优势，但它也有一些关键的局限性——即，它经常导致已经在学术文献中找到的结果。一般来说，试图通过检验新假设来建立当前知识的研究更加侧重于确保我们推动当前知识向前发展。尽管如此，扎根理论方法在许多情况下非常有用，它揭示了可能无法通过其他方法生成的重要新信息。因此，总的来说，这种方法对定性研究人员具有很大的价值，并且非常有用，尤其是在探索特定的案例研究项目时。我还发现它与行动研究项目很好地结合在一起。

References

Atkinson, P. (2015). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: Valid qualitative research strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 6(1), 83-86.

Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide. London: Sage.

Bringer, J. D., Johnston, L. H., & Brackenridge, C. H. (2016). Using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software to develop a grounded theory project. Field Methods, 18(3), 245-266.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications.

McGhee, G., Marland, G. R., & Atkinson, J. (2017). Grounded theory research: Literature reviewing and reflexivity. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(3), 654-663.

Mills, J., Bonner, A., & Francis, K. (2017). Adopting a Constructivist Approach to Grounded Theory: Implications for Research Design. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 13(2), 81-89.

Chris Drew (PhD)

---

Qualitative Research: Characteristics, Design, Methods & Examples

定性研究：特性、设计、方法和示例

By Lauren McCall
Updated on January 8, 2024

Qualitative research is a type of research methodology. that focuses on gathering and analyzing non-numerical data to gain a deeper understanding of human behavior, experiences, and perspectives.
定性研究是一种研究方法，专注于收集和分析非数值数据，以更深入地了解人类的行为、经验和观点。

It aims to explore the “why” and “how” of a phenomenon rather than the “what,” “where,” and “when” typically addressed by quantitative research.
它旨在探索现象的“为什么”和“如何”，而不是定量研究通常涉及的“什么”、“在哪里”和“何时”。

Unlike quantitative research, which focuses on gathering and analyzing numerical data for statistical analysis, qualitative research involves researchers interpreting data to identify themes, patterns, and meanings.
与专注于收集和分析数值数据进行统计分析的定量研究不同，定性研究涉及研究人员解释数据以确定主题、模式和意义。

Qualitative research can be used to:

定性研究可用于：

1. Gain deep contextual understandings of the subjective social reality of individuals
   深入了解个人的主观社会现实
2. To answer questions about experience and meaning from the participant’s perspective
   从参与者的角度回答有关体验和意义的问题
3. To design hypotheses, theory must be researched using qualitative methods to determine what is important before research can begin.
   为了设计假设，必须使用定性方法研究理论，以确定在研究开始之前什么是重要的。

Examples of qualitative research questions include:

定性研究问题的示例包括：

• How does stress influence young adults’ behavior?
  压力如何影响年轻人的行为？
• What factors influence students’ school attendance rates in developed countries?
  哪些因素会影响发达国家学生的入学率？
• How do adults interpret binge drinking in the UK?
  在英国，成年人如何解释酗酒？
• What are the psychological impacts of cervical cancer screening in women?
  宫颈癌筛查对女性的心理影响是什么？
• How can mental health lessons be integrated into the school curriculum?
  如何将心理健康课程整合到学校课程中？

Characteristics

特性

Naturalistic setting

自然主义环境

Individuals are studied in their natural setting to gain a deeper understanding of how people experience the world. This enables the researcher to understand a phenomenon close to how participants experience it.
在自然环境中研究个人，以更深入地了解人们如何体验世界。这使研究人员能够理解接近参与者体验的现象。

Naturalistic settings provide valuable contextual information to help researchers better understand and interpret the data they collect.
自然设置提供了有价值的上下文信息，以帮助研究人员更好地理解和解释他们收集的数据。

The environment, social interactions, and cultural factors can all influence behavior and experiences, and these elements are more easily observed in real-world settings.
环境、社会互动和文化因素都会影响行为和体验，而这些元素在现实世界中更容易观察到。

Reality is socially constructed

现实是社会建构的

Qualitative research aims to understand how participants make meaning of their experiences – individually or in social contexts. It assumes there is no objective reality. and that the social world is interpreted (Yilmaz, 2013).
定性研究旨在了解参与者如何理解他们的经历——个人或社会背景。它假设没有客观现实，并且社会世界被解释（Yilmaz，2013）。

The primacy of subject matter

主题的首要地位

The primary aim of qualitative research is to understand the perspectives, experiences, and beliefs of individuals who have experienced the phenomenon selected for research rather than the average experiences of groups of people (Minichiello, 1990).
定性研究的主要目的是了解经历过被选中进行研究的现象的个人的观点、经验和信念，而不是人群的平均经历（Minichiello，1990）。

An in-depth understanding is attained since qualitative techniques allow participants to freely disclose their experiences, thoughts, and feelings without constraint (Tenny et al., 2022).
由于定性技术允许参与者不受限制地自由披露他们的经历、想法和感受，因此可以获得深入的理解（Tenny 等人，2022 年）。

Variables are complex, interwoven, and difficult to measure

变量复杂、交织且难以测量

Factors such as experiences, behaviors, and attitudes are complex and interwoven, so they cannot be reduced to isolated variables., making them difficult to measure quantitatively.
经验、行为和态度等因素是复杂且交织在一起的，因此它们不能被简化为孤立的变量，因此难以定量测量。

However, a qualitative approach enables participants to describe what, why, or how they were thinking/ feeling during a phenomenon being studied (Yilmaz, 2013).
然而，定性方法使参与者能够描述他们在所研究的现象期间的想法/感受是什么、为什么或如何（Yilmaz，2013 年）。

Emic (insider’s point of view)

Emic（内部人士的观点）

The phenomenon being studied is centered on the participants’ point of view (Minichiello, 1990).
所研究的现象以参与者的观点为中心（Minichiello，1990）。

Emic is used to describe how participants interact, communicate, and behave in the research setting (Scarduzio, 2017).
Emic 用于描述参与者在研究环境中的互动、沟通和行为方式（Scarduzio，2017 年）。

Interpretive analysis

解释分析

In qualitative research, interpretive analysis is crucial in making sense of the collected data.
在定性研究中，解释性分析对于理解收集的数据至关重要。

This process involves examining the raw data, such as interview transcripts, field notes, or documents, and identifying the underlying themes, patterns, and meanings that emerge from the participants’ experiences and perspectives.
这个过程包括检查原始数据，例如采访记录、现场笔记或文件，并确定从参与者的经历和观点中出现的潜在主题、模式和意义。

Collecting Qualitative Data

收集定性数据

There are four main research design methods used to collect qualitative data: observations, interviews, focus groups, and ethnography.
收集定性数据的主要研究设计方法有四种：观察、访谈、焦点小组和人种学。

Observations

观察

This method involves watching and recording phenomena as they occur in nature. Observation. can be divided into two types: participant and non-participant observation.
这种方法涉及观察和记录自然界中发生的现象。观察可分为两种类型：参与者和非参与者观察。

In participant observation, the researcher actively participates in the situation/events being observed.
在参与者观察中，研究人员积极参与被观察的情况/事件。

In non-participant observation, the researcher is not an active part of the observation and tries not to influence the behaviors they are observing (Busetto et al., 2020).
在非参与者观察中，研究人员不是观察的积极部分，并尽量不影响他们正在观察的行为（Busetto et al.， 2020）。

Observations can be covert (participants are unaware that a researcher is observing them) or overt (participants are aware of the researcher’s presence and know they are being observed).
观察可以是隐蔽的（参与者不知道研究人员正在观察他们）或公开的（参与者知道研究人员的存在并知道他们正在被观察）。

However, awareness of an observer’s presence may influence participants’ behavior.
但是，对观察者的存在的认识可能会影响参与者的行为。

Interviews

采访

Interviews. give researchers a window into the world of a participant by seeking their account of an event, situation, or phenomenon. They are usually conducted on a one-to-one basis and can be distinguished according to the level at which they are structured (Punch, 2013).
访谈通过寻求参与者对事件、情况或现象的描述，为研究人员提供了一个了解参与者世界的窗口。它们通常是在一对一的基础上进行的，并且可以根据它们的结构级别进行区分（Punch，2013 年）。

Structured interviews involve predetermined questions and sequences to ensure replicability and comparability. However, they are unable to explore emerging issues.
结构化访谈涉及预先确定的问题和序列，以确保可复制性和可比性。然而，他们无法探索新出现的问题。

Informal interviews consist of spontaneous, casual conversations which are closer to the truth of a phenomenon. However, information is gathered using quick notes made by the researcher and is therefore subject to recall bias.
非正式访谈包括更接近现象真相的自发、随意的对话。然而，信息是使用研究人员所做的快速笔记收集的，因此会受到回忆偏差的影响。

Semi-structured interviews have a flexible structure, phrasing, and placement so emerging issues can be explored (Denny & Weckesser, 2022).
半结构化访谈具有灵活的结构、措辞和位置，因此可以探索新出现的问题（Denny & Weckesser，2022）。

The use of probing questions and clarification can lead to a detailed understanding, but semi-structured interviews can be time-consuming and subject to interviewer bias.
使用探究性问题和澄清可以导致详细的理解，但半结构化访谈可能很耗时并且容易受到面试官偏见的影响。

Focus groups

焦点小组

Similar to interviews, focus groups. elicit a rich and detailed account of an experience. However, focus groups are more dynamic since participants with shared characteristics construct this account together (Denny & Weckesser, 2022).
与访谈类似，焦点小组会引出对经历的丰富而详细的描述。然而，焦点小组更加动态，因为具有共同特征的参与者一起构建这个账户（Denny & Weckesser，2022）。

A shared narrative is built between participants to capture a group experience shaped by a shared context.
参与者之间建立了一个共享的叙述，以捕捉由共享环境塑造的团队体验。

The researcher takes on the role of a moderator, who will establish ground rules and guide the discussion by following a topic guide to focus the group discussions.
研究人员担任主持人的角色，他将制定基本规则并通过遵循主题指南来指导讨论，以集中小组讨论。

Typically, focus groups have 4-10 participants as a discussion can be difficult to facilitate with more than this, and this number allows everyone the time to speak.
通常，焦点小组有 4-10 名参与者，因为超过这个人数可能很难促进讨论，而这个数字让每个人都有发言的时间。

Ethnography

民族志

Ethnography. is a methodology used to study a group of people’s behaviors and social interactions in their environment (Reeves et al., 2008).
民族志是一种用于研究一群人在其环境中的行为和社会互动的方法（Reeves et al.， 2008）。

Data are collected using methods such as observations, field notes, or structured/ unstructured interviews.
数据是使用观察、实地笔记或结构化/非结构化访谈等方法收集的。

The aim of ethnography is to provide detailed, holistic insights into people’s behavior and perspectives within their natural setting. In order to achieve this, researchers immerse themselves in a community or organization.
民族志的目的是对人们在自然环境中的行为和观点提供详细、全面的见解。为了实现这一目标，研究人员将自己沉浸在社区或组织中。

Due to the flexibility and real-world focus of ethnography, researchers are able to gather an in-depth, nuanced understanding of people’s experiences, knowledge and perspectives that are influenced by culture and society.
由于民族志的灵活性和对现实世界的关注，研究人员能够对受文化和社会影响的人们的经历、知识和观点进行深入、细致的理解。

In order to develop a representative picture of a particular culture/ context, researchers must conduct extensive field work.
为了形成特定文化/背景的代表性图景，研究人员必须进行广泛的实地考察。

This can be time-consuming as researchers may need to immerse themselves into a community/ culture for a few days, or possibly a few years.
这可能很耗时，因为研究人员可能需要将自己沉浸在社区/文化中几天，甚至几年。

Qualitative Data Analysis Methods

定性数据分析方法

Different methods can be used for analyzing qualitative data. The researcher chooses based on the objectives of their study.
可以使用不同的方法来分析定性数据。研究人员根据他们的研究目标进行选择。

The researcher plays a key role in the interpretation of data, making decisions about the coding, theming, decontextualizing, and recontextualizing of data (Starks & Trinidad, 2007).
研究人员在数据的解释中起着关键作用，做出关于编码、主题化、去情境化和重新语境化数据的决策（Starks & Trinidad， 2007）。

Grounded theory

扎根理论

Grounded theory. is a qualitative method specifically designed to inductively generate theory from data. It was developed by Glaser and Strauss in 1967 (Glaser & Strauss, 2017).
扎根理论是一种定性方法，专门用于从数据中归纳生成理论。它由Glaser和Strauss于1967年开发（Glaser & Strauss， 2017）。

This methodology aims to develop theories (rather than test hypotheses) that explain a social process, action, or interaction (Petty et al., 2012). To inform the developing theory, data collection and analysis run simultaneously.
该方法旨在开发解释社会过程、行动或互动的理论（而不是检验假设）（Petty et al.， 2012）。为了给发展中的理论提供信息，数据收集和分析同时进行。

There are three key types of coding used in grounded theory: initial (open), intermediate (axial), and advanced (selective) coding.
扎根理论中使用了三种主要类型的编码：初始（开放）、中间（轴向）和高级（选择性）编码。

Throughout the analysis, memos should be created to document methodological and theoretical ideas about the data. Data should be collected and analyzed until data saturation. is reached and a theory is developed.
在整个分析过程中，应创建备忘录来记录有关数据的方法论和理论思想。应收集和分析数据，直到达到数据饱和并形成理论。

Content analysis

含量分析

Content analysis was first used in the early twentieth century to analyze textual materials such as newspapers and political speeches.
内容分析在 20 世纪初首次用于分析报纸和政治演讲等文本材料。

Content analysis is a research method used to identify and analyze the presence and patterns of themes, concepts, or words in data (Vaismoradi et al., 2013).
内容分析是一种用于识别和分析数据中主题、概念或单词的存在和模式的研究方法（Vaismoradi et al.， 2013）。

This research method can be used to analyze data in different formats, which can be written, oral, or visual.
这种研究方法可用于分析不同格式的数据，可以是书面、口头或视觉数据。

The goal of content analysis is to develop themes that capture the underlying meanings of data (Schreier, 2012).
内容分析的目标是开发捕捉数据潜在含义的主题（Schreier，2012 年）。

Qualitative content analysis can be used to validate existing theories, support the development of new models and theories, and provide in-depth descriptions of particular settings or experiences.
定性内容分析可用于验证现有理论，支持新模型和理论的开发，并提供对特定设置或体验的深入描述。

The following six steps provide a guideline for how to conduct qualitative content analysis.
以下 6 个步骤为如何进行定性内容分析提供了指南。

1. Define a Research Question: To start content analysis, a clear research question should be developed.
   定义一个研究问题： 要开始内容分析，应该制定一个明确的研究问题。
2. Identify and Collect Data: Establish the inclusion criteria for your data. Find the relevant sources to analyze.
   识别和收集数据：建立数据的包含标准。查找要分析的相关来源。
3. Define the Unit or Theme of Analysis: Categorize the content into themes. Themes can be a word, phrase, or sentence.
   Define the Unit or Theme of Analysis：将内容分类为主题。主题可以是单词、短语或句子。
4. Develop Rules for Coding your Data: Define a set of coding rules to ensure that all data are coded consistently.
   制定数据编码规则：定义一组编码规则，以确保所有数据的编码一致。
5. Code the Data: Follow the coding rules to categorize data into themes.
   对数据进行编码：按照编码规则将数据分类到主题中。
6. Analyze the Results and Draw Conclusions: Examine the data to identify patterns and draw conclusions in relation to your research question.
   分析结果并得出结论： 检查数据以确定模式并得出与您的研究问题相关的结论。

Discourse analysis

话语分析

Discourse analysis. is a research method used to study written/ spoken language in relation to its social context (Wood & Kroger, 2000).
话语分析是一种研究方法，用于研究书面/口语与其社会背景的关系（Wood & Kroger， 2000）。

In discourse analysis, the researcher interprets details of language materials and the context in which it is situated.
在语篇分析中，研究人员解释语言材料的细节及其所处的背景。

Discourse analysis aims to understand the functions of language (how language is used in real life) and how meaning is conveyed by language in different contexts. Researchers use discourse analysis to investigate social groups and how language is used to achieve specific communication goals.
语篇分析旨在了解语言的功能（语言在现实生活中的使用方式）以及语言在不同语境中如何传达意义。研究人员使用话语分析来调查社会群体以及如何使用语言来实现特定的沟通目标。

Different methods of discourse analysis can be used depending on the aims and objectives of a study. However, the following steps provide a guideline on how to conduct discourse analysis.
根据研究的目的和目标，可以使用不同的话语分析方法。但是，以下步骤提供了有关如何进行话语分析的指南。

1. Define the Research Question: Develop a relevant research question to frame the analysis.
   定义研究问题： 制定一个相关的研究问题来构建分析。
2. Gather Data and Establish the Context: Collect research materials (e.g., interview transcripts, documents). Gather factual details and review the literature to construct a theory about the social and historical context of your study.
   收集数据并建立背景： 收集研究材料（例如，采访记录、文件）。收集事实细节并回顾文献，以构建关于您研究的社会和历史背景的理论。
3. Analyze the Content: Closely examine various components of the text, such as the vocabulary, sentences, paragraphs, and structure of the text. Identify patterns relevant to the research question to create codes, then group these into themes.
   分析内容： 仔细检查文本的各个组成部分，例如文本的词汇、句子、段落和结构。确定与研究问题相关的模式以创建代码，然后将这些代码分组到主题中。
4. Review the Results: Reflect on the findings to examine the function of the language, and the meaning and context of the discourse.
   回顾结果： 反思研究结果以检查语言的功能，以及话语的含义和上下文。

Thematic analysis

主题分析

Thematic analysis. is a method used to identify, interpret, and report patterns in data, such as commonalities or contrasts.
主题分析是一种用于识别、解释和报告数据模式（例如共性或对比）的方法。

Although the origin of thematic analysis can be traced back to the early twentieth century, understanding and clarity of thematic analysis is attributed to Braun and Clarke (2006).
尽管主题分析的起源可以追溯到 20 世纪初，但主题分析的理解和清晰度归功于 Braun 和 Clarke （2006）。

Thematic analysis aims to develop themes (patterns of meaning) across a dataset to address a research question.
主题分析旨在在整个数据集中开发主题（意义模式）以解决研究问题。

In thematic analysis, qualitative data is gathered using techniques such as interviews, focus groups, and questionnaires. Audio recordings are transcribed. The dataset is then explored and interpreted by a researcher to identify patterns.
在主题分析中，使用访谈、焦点小组和问卷调查等技术收集定性数据。录音被转录。然后，研究人员对数据集进行探索和解释，以识别模式。

This occurs through the rigorous process of data familiarisation, coding, theme development, and revision. These identified patterns provide a summary of the dataset and can be used to address a research question.
这是通过严格的数据熟悉、编码、主题开发和修订过程来实现的。这些识别的模式提供了数据集的摘要，可用于解决研究问题。

Themes are developed by exploring the implicit and explicit meanings within the data. Two different approaches are used to generate themes: inductive and deductive.
主题是通过探索数据中的隐含和显式含义来开发的。使用两种不同的方法来生成主题：归纳和演绎。

An inductive approach allows themes to emerge from the data. In contrast, a deductive approach uses existing theories or knowledge to apply preconceived ideas to the data.
归纳方法允许主题从数据中出现。相比之下，演绎方法使用现有的理论或知识将先入为主的想法应用于数据。

Phases of Thematic Analysis

主题分析的阶段

Braun and Clarke (2006) provide a guide of the six phases of thematic analysis. These phases can be applied flexibly to fit research questions and data.
Braun 和 Clarke （2006） 提供了主题分析的六个阶段的指南。这些阶段可以灵活地应用于适合研究问题和数据。

Phase	Procedure for each step
1. Gather and transcribe data	Gather raw data, for example interviews or focus groups, and transcribe audio recordings fully
2. Familiarization with data	Read and reread all your data from beginning to end; note down initial ideas
3. Create initial codes	Start identifying preliminary codes which highlight important features of the data and may be relevant to the research question
4. Create new codes which encapsulate potential themes	Review initial codes and explore any similarities, differences, or contradictions to uncover underlying themes; create a map to visualize identified themes
5. Take a break then return to the data	Take a break and then return later to review themes
6. Evaluate themes for good fit	Last opportunity for analysis; check themes are supported and saturated with data

Template analysis

模板分析

Template analysis refers to a specific method of thematic analysis which uses hierarchical coding (Brooks et al., 2014).
模板分析是指使用分层编码的主题分析的特定方法（Brooks et al.， 2014）。

Template analysis is used to analyze textual data, for example, interview transcripts or open-ended responses on a written questionnaire.
模板分析用于分析文本数据，例如，访谈记录或书面问卷上的开放式回答。

To conduct template analysis, a coding template must be developed (usually from a subset of the data) and subsequently revised and refined. This template represents the themes identified by researchers as important in the dataset.
要进行模板分析，必须开发编码模板（通常来自数据的子集），然后进行修订和优化。此模板表示研究人员在数据集中确定为重要的主题。

Codes are ordered hierarchically within the template, with the highest-level codes demonstrating overarching themes in the data and lower-level codes representing constituent themes with a narrower focus.
代码在模板中按层次结构排序，最高级别的代码表示数据中的总体主题，而较低级别的代码表示具有较窄关注点的构成主题。

A guideline for the main procedural steps for conducting template analysis is outlined below.
下面概述了执行模板分析的主要程序步骤的指南。

1. Familiarization with the Data: Read (and reread) the dataset in full. Engage, reflect, and take notes on data that may be relevant to the research question.
   熟悉数据：完整阅读（和重新读取）数据集。参与、反思和记录可能与研究问题相关的数据。
2. Preliminary Coding: Identify initial codes using guidance from the a priori codes, identified before the analysis as likely to be beneficial and relevant to the analysis.
   初步编码：使用先验代码的指导确定初始代码，这些代码在分析之前确定为可能有益且与分析相关。
3. Organize Themes: Organize themes into meaningful clusters. Consider the relationships between the themes both within and between clusters.
   组织主题：将主题组织到有意义的集群中。考虑集群内和集群之间的主题之间的关系。
4. Produce an Initial Template: Develop an initial template. This may be based on a subset of the data.
   生成初始模板：开发初始模板。这可能基于数据的子集。
5. Apply and Develop the Template: Apply the initial template to further data and make any necessary modifications. Refinements of the template may include adding themes, removing themes, or changing the scope/title of themes.
   Apply and Develop the Template：将初始模板应用于更多数据并进行任何必要的修改。模板的优化可能包括添加主题、删除主题或更改主题的范围/标题。
6. Finalize Template: Finalize the template, then apply it to the entire dataset.
   Finalize Template：完成模板，然后将其应用于整个数据集。

Frame analysis

帧分析

Frame analysis is a comparative form of thematic analysis which systematically analyzes data using a matrix output.
框架分析是主题分析的一种比较形式，它使用矩阵输出系统地分析数据。

Ritchie and Spencer (1994) developed this set of techniques to analyze qualitative data in applied policy research. Frame analysis aims to generate theory from data.
Ritchie 和 Spencer （1994） 开发了这套技术来分析应用政策研究中的定性数据。框架分析旨在从数据中生成理论。

Frame analysis encourages researchers to organize and manage their data using summarization.
框架分析鼓励研究人员使用摘要来组织和管理他们的数据。

This results in a flexible and unique matrix output, in which individual participants (or cases) are represented by rows and themes are represented by columns.
这会产生灵活而独特的矩阵输出，其中单个参与者（或案例）由行表示，主题由列表示。

Each intersecting cell is used to summarize findings relating to the corresponding participant and theme.
每个相交的单元格用于总结与相应参与者和主题相关的调查结果。

Frame analysis has five distinct phases which are interrelated, forming a methodical and rigorous framework.
框架分析有五个相互关联的不同阶段，形成了一个有条不紊且严格的框架。

1. Familiarization with the Data: Familiarize yourself with all the transcripts. Immerse yourself in the details of each transcript and start to note recurring themes.
   熟悉数据：熟悉所有成绩单。让自己沉浸在每个成绩单的细节中，并开始记下反复出现的主题。
2. Develop a Theoretical Framework: Identify recurrent/ important themes and add them to a chart. Provide a framework/ structure for the analysis.
   开发理论框架：确定反复出现/重要的主题并将它们添加到图表中。为分析提供框架/结构。
3. Indexing: Apply the framework systematically to the entire study data.
   索引：将框架系统地应用于整个研究数据。
4. Summarize Data in Analytical Framework: Reduce the data into brief summaries of participants’ accounts.
   在 Analytical Framework 中汇总数据：将数据缩减为参与者账户的简短摘要。
5. Mapping and Interpretation: Compare themes and subthemes and check against the original transcripts. Group the data into categories and provide an explanation for them.
   映射和解释：比较主题和子主题，并与原始成绩单进行核对。将数据分组到各个类别中，并为其提供解释。

Preventing Bias in Qualitative Research

防止定性研究中的偏见

To evaluate qualitative studies, the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) checklist for qualitative studies can be used to ensure all aspects of a study have been considered (CASP, 2018).
为了评估定性研究，可以使用定性研究的 CASP（批判性评估技能计划）清单来确保考虑了研究的所有方面（CASP，2018 年）。

The quality of research can be enhanced and assessed using criteria such as checklists, reflexivity, co-coding, and member-checking.
可以使用清单、自反性、共同编码和成员检查等标准来提高和评估研究质量。

Co-coding

共同编码

Relying on only one researcher to interpret rich and complex data may risk key insights and alternative viewpoints being missed. Therefore, coding is often performed by multiple researchers.
仅依靠一名研究人员来解释丰富而复杂的数据可能会错过关键见解和替代观点。因此，编码通常由多个研究人员执行。

A common strategy must be defined at the beginning of the coding process (Busetto et al., 2020). This includes establishing a useful coding list and finding a common definition of individual codes.
必须在编码过程开始时定义一个通用策略（Busetto et al.， 2020）。这包括建立一个有用的编码列表和查找各个代码的通用定义。

Transcripts are initially coded independently by researchers and then compared and consolidated to minimize error or bias and to bring confirmation of findings.
转录本最初由研究人员独立编码，然后进行比较和合并，以最大限度地减少错误或偏倚并确认结果。

Member checking

会员检查

Member checking. (or respondent validation) involves checking back with participants to see if the research resonates with their experiences (Russell & Gregory, 2003).
成员检查（或回应者验证）包括与参与者进行核对，看看研究是否与他们的经历产生共鸣（Russell & Gregory），2003年）。

Data can be returned to participants after data collection or when results are first available. For example, participants may be provided with their interview transcript and asked to verify whether this is a complete and accurate representation of their views.
数据收集后或首次获得结果时，可以将数据返回给参与者。例如，可能会向参与者提供他们的采访记录，并要求他们验证这是否完整准确地表达了他们的观点。

Participants may then clarify or elaborate on their responses to ensure they align with their views (Shenton, 2004).
然后，参与者可以澄清或详细说明他们的回答，以确保他们与他们的观点一致（Shenton，2004 年）。

This feedback becomes part of data collection and ensures accurate descriptions/ interpretations of phenomena (Mays & Pope, 2000).
这种反馈成为数据收集的一部分，并确保对现象的准确描述/解释（Mays & Pope，2000年）。

Reflexivity in qualitative research

定性研究中的反身性

Reflexivity. typically involves examining your own judgments, practices, and belief systems during data collection and analysis. It aims to identify any personal beliefs which may affect the research.
反身性通常涉及在数据收集和分析过程中检查您自己的判断、做法和信仰体系。它旨在确定可能影响研究的任何个人信念。

Reflexivity is essential in qualitative research to ensure methodological transparency and complete reporting. This enables readers to understand how the interaction between the researcher and participant shapes the data.
反身性在定性研究中至关重要，以确保方法的透明度和完整的报告。这使读者能够了解研究人员和参与者之间的互动如何塑造数据。

Depending on the research question and population being researched, factors that need to be considered include the experience of the researcher, how the contact was established and maintained, age, gender, and ethnicity.
根据研究问题和所研究的人群，需要考虑的因素包括研究人员的经验、联系方式的建立和维持方式、年龄、性别和种族。

These details are important because, in qualitative research, the researcher is a dynamic part of the research process and actively influences the outcome of the research (Boeije, 2014).
这些细节很重要，因为在定性研究中，研究人员是研究过程中的动态部分，并积极影响研究的结果（Boeije，2014）。

Reflexivity Example Reflexivity

示例

Who you are and your characteristics influence how you collect and analyze data. Here is an example of a reflexivity statement for research on smoking.

I am a 30-year-old white female from a middle-class background. I live in the southwest of England and have been educated to master’s level. I have been involved in two research projects on oral health. I have never smoked, but I have witnessed how smoking can cause ill health from my volunteering in a smoking cessation clinic.

My research aspirations are to help to develop interventions to help smokers quit.
您是谁以及您的特征会影响您收集和分析数据的方式。这是一个用于吸烟研究的反身性陈述的例子。 我是一名来自中产阶级背景的 30 岁白人女性。我住在英格兰西南部，接受过硕士水平的教育。我参与了两个关于口腔健康的研究项目。我从来没有抽过烟，但我从我在戒烟诊所做志愿者时亲眼目睹了吸烟如何导致健康不佳。 我的研究目标是帮助开发帮助吸烟者戒烟的干预措施。

Establishing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research

在定性研究中建立可信度

Trustworthiness. is a concept used to assess the quality and rigor of qualitative research.. Four criteria are used to assess a study’s trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability.
可信度是用于评估定性研究的质量和严谨性的概念。四个标准用于评估研究的可信度：可信度、可转移性、可靠性和可确认性。

1. Credibility in Qualitative Research

1. 定性研究的可信度

Credibility. refers to how accurately the results represent the reality and viewpoints of the participants.
可信度是指结果代表参与者的现实和观点的准确程度。

To establish credibility in research, participants’ views and the researcher’s representation of their views need to align (Tobin & Begley, 2004).
为了在研究中建立可信度，参与者的观点和研究人员对他们观点的代表需要保持一致（Tobin & Begley，2004）。

To increase the credibility of findings, researchers may use data source triangulation, investigator triangulation, peer debriefing., or member checking. (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
为了提高结果的可信度，研究人员可能会使用数据源三角测量、研究者三角测量、同行汇报或成员检查（Lincoln & Guba， 1985）。

Thick description. can improve credibility by providing a detailed account of the research context, the participants’ experiences, and the researcher’s interpretive process.
详尽的描述可以通过提供研究背景、参与者的经历和研究人员的解释过程的详细描述来提高可信度。

This detailed portrayal allows readers to “see” the research setting, “hear” the participants’ voices, and understand the reasoning behind the researcher’s conclusions.
这种详细的描绘使读者能够“看到”研究环境，“听到”参与者的声音，并理解研究人员结论背后的原因。

2. Transferability in Qualitative Research

2. 定性研究中的可转移性

Transferability. refers to how generalizable the findings are: whether the findings may be applied to another context, setting, or group (Tobin & Begley, 2004).
可转移性是指研究结果的普遍性：研究结果是否可以应用于其他环境、环境或群体（Tobin & Begley， 2004）。

Transferability can be enhanced by giving thorough and in-depth descriptions of the research setting, sample, and methods (Nowell et al., 2017).
通过对研究环境、样本和方法进行全面和深入的描述，可以提高可转移性（Nowell et al.， 2017）。

3. Dependability in Qualitative Research

3. 定性研究的可靠性

Dependability. in qualitative research refers to the stability and consistency of the research findings over time.
定性研究的可靠性是指研究结果随时间推移的稳定性和一致性。

Researchers can establish dependability using methods such as audit trails so readers can see the research process is logical and traceable (Koch, 1994).
研究人员可以使用审计跟踪等方法建立可靠性，以便读者可以看到研究过程是合乎逻辑且可追溯的（Koch，1994 年）。

4. Confirmability in Qualitative Research

4. 定性研究的可证实性

Confirmability. is concerned with establishing that there is a clear link between the researcher’s interpretations/ findings and the data.
可确认性涉及确定研究人员的解释/发现与数据之间存在明确的联系。

Researchers can achieve confirmability by demonstrating how conclusions and interpretations were arrived at (Nowell et al., 2017).
研究人员可以通过展示如何得出结论和解释来实现可确认性（Nowell et al.， 2017）。

This enables readers to understand the reasoning behind the decisions made.
这使读者能够理解所做决定背后的原因。

Audit Trails in Qualitative Research

定性研究中的审计跟踪

An audit trail. provides evidence of the decisions made by the researcher regarding theory, research design, and data collection, as well as the steps they have chosen to manage, analyze, and report data.
审计跟踪提供了研究人员在理论、研究设计和数据收集方面做出的决策的证据，以及他们选择管理、分析和报告数据的步骤。

The researcher must provide a clear rationale to demonstrate how conclusions were reached in their study.
研究人员必须提供明确的理由来证明他们的研究是如何得出结论的。

A clear description of the research path must be provided to enable readers to trace through the researcher’s logic (Halpren, 1983).
必须提供对研究路径的清晰描述，以使读者能够追溯研究人员的逻辑（Halpren，1983）。

Researchers should maintain records of the raw data, field notes, transcripts, and a reflective journal in order to provide a clear audit trail.
研究人员应保留原始数据、现场笔记、成绩单和反思日志的记录，以提供清晰的审计跟踪。

Advantages

优势

Discovery of unexpected data

发现意外数据

Open-ended questions in qualitative research mean the researcher can probe an interview topic and enable the participant to elaborate on responses in an unrestricted manner.
定性研究中的开放式问题意味着研究人员可以探索访谈主题，并使参与者能够不受限制地详细说明回答。

This allows unexpected data to emerge, which can lead to further research into that topic.
这允许出现意想不到的数据，这可能会导致对该主题的进一步研究。

The exploratory nature of qualitative research helps generate hypotheses that can be tested quantitatively (Busetto et al., 2020).
定性研究的探索性有助于产生可以定量检验的假设（Busetto et al.， 2020）。

Flexibility

灵活性

Data collection and analysis can be modified and adapted to take the research in a different direction if new ideas or patterns emerge in the data.
如果数据中出现新的想法或模式，可以修改和调整数据收集和分析，以将研究推向不同的方向。

This enables researchers to investigate new opportunities while firmly maintaining their research goals.
这使研究人员能够在坚定地保持其研究目标的同时探索新的机会。

Naturalistic settings

自然主义设置

The behaviors of participants are recorded in real-world settings. Studies that use real-world settings have high ecological validity since participants behave more authentically.
参与者的行为被记录在真实环境中。使用真实世界设置的研究具有很高的生态效度，因为参与者的行为更真实。

Limitations

局限性

Time-consuming

耗时的

Qualitative research results in large amounts of data which often need to be transcribed and analyzed manually.
定性研究会产生大量数据，这些数据通常需要手动转录和分析。

Even when software is used, transcription can be inaccurate, and using software for analysis can result in many codes which need to be condensed into themes.
即使使用软件，转录也可能不准确，使用软件进行分析会导致许多代码需要浓缩成主题。

Subjectivity

主观性

The researcher has an integral role in collecting and interpreting qualitative data. Therefore, the conclusions reached are from their perspective and experience.
研究人员在收集和解释定性数据方面发挥着不可或缺的作用。因此，得出的结论来自他们的观点和经验。

Consequently, interpretations of data from another researcher may vary greatly.
因此，对其他研究人员的数据的解释可能会有很大差异。

Limited generalizability

有限的泛化性

The aim of qualitative research is to provide a detailed, contextualized understanding of an aspect of the human experience from a relatively small sample size.
定性研究的目的是从相对较小的样本量中提供对人类体验某个方面的详细、情境化的理解。

Despite rigorous analysis procedures, conclusions drawn cannot be generalized to the wider population since data may be biased or unrepresentative.
尽管有严格的分析程序，但由于数据可能存在偏差或不具有代表性，因此得出的结论不能推广到更广泛的人群。

Therefore, results are only applicable to a small group of the population.
因此，结果仅适用于一小部分总体。

While individual qualitative studies are often limited in their generalizability due to factors such as sample size and context,metasynthesis . enables researchers to synthesize findings from multiple studies, potentially leading to more generalizable conclusions.
虽然由于样本量和背景等因素，单个定性研究的普遍性通常受到限制，但元综合使研究人员能够综合多项研究的结果，从而可能得出更普遍的结论。

By integrating findings from studies conducted in diverse settings and with different populations, metasynthesis can provide broader insights into the phenomenon of interest.
通过整合在不同环境和不同人群中进行的研究结果，元合成可以为感兴趣的现象提供更广泛的见解。

Extraneous variables

无关变量

Qualitative research is often conducted in real-world settings. This may cause results to be unreliable since extraneous variables. may affect the data, for example:
定性研究通常在现实世界中进行。这可能会导致结果不可靠，因为无关的变量可能会影响数据，例如：

• Situational variables: different environmental conditions may influence participants’ behavior in a study. The random variation in factors (such as noise or lighting) may be difficult to control in real-world settings.
  情境变量：不同的环境条件可能会影响参与者在研究中的行为。在实际环境中，因素（如噪声或照明）的随机变化可能难以控制。
• Participant characteristics: this includes any characteristics that may influence how a participant answers/ behaves in a study. This may include a participant’s mood, gender, age, ethnicity, sexual identity, IQ, etc.
  参与者特征：这包括可能影响参与者在研究中回答/行为方式的任何特征。这可能包括参与者的情绪、性别、年龄、种族、性认同、智商等。
• Experimenter effect: experimenter effect refers to how a researcher’s unintentional influence can change the outcome of a study. This occurs when (i) their interactions with participants unintentionally change participants’ behaviors or (ii) due to errors in observation, interpretation, or analysis.
  实验者效应：实验者效应是指研究人员的无意影响如何改变研究的结果。当 （i） 他们与参与者的互动无意中改变了参与者的行为，或 （ii） 由于观察、解释或分析错误时，就会发生这种情况。

FAQs

What sample size should qualitative research be?

定性研究的样本量应该是多少？

The sample size for qualitative studies has been recommended to include a minimum of 12 participants to reach data saturation (Braun, 2013).
建议定性研究的样本量至少包括 12 名参与者以达到数据饱和（Braun，2013 年）。

Are surveys qualitative or quantitative?

调查是定性的还是定量的？

Surveys can be used to gather information from a sample qualitatively or quantitatively. Qualitative surveys use open-ended questions to gather detailed information from a large sample using free text responses.
调查可用于从样本中收集定性或定量信息。定性调查使用开放式问题，通过自由文本响应从大型样本中收集详细信息。

The use of open-ended questions allows for unrestricted responses where participants use their own words, enabling the collection of more in-depth information than closed-ended questions.
使用开放式问题允许参与者使用自己的话进行不受限制的回答，从而能够收集比封闭式问题更深入的信息。

In contrast, quantitative surveys consist of closed-ended questions with multiple-choice answer options. Quantitative surveys are ideal to gather a statistical representation of a population.
相比之下，定量调查由带有多项选择答案选项的封闭式问题组成。定量调查是收集人口统计表示的理想选择。

What are the ethical considerations of qualitative research?.

定性研究的伦理考虑是什么？

Before conducting a study, you must think about any risks that could occur and take steps to prevent them.
在进行研究之前，您必须考虑可能发生的任何风险并采取措施预防它们。

Participant Protection: Researchers must protect participants from physical and mental harm. This means you must not embarrass, frighten, offend, or harm participants.
参与者保护：研究人员必须保护参与者免受身心伤害。这意味着您不得让参与者感到尴尬、恐吓、冒犯或伤害。

Transparency: Researchers are obligated to clearly communicate how they will collect, store, analyze, use, and share the data.
透明度：研究人员有义务清楚地说明他们将如何收集、存储、分析、使用和共享数据。

Confidentiality: You need to consider how to maintain the confidentiality and anonymity of participants’ data.
机密性：您需要考虑如何维护参与者数据的机密性和匿名性。

What is triangulation in qualitative research?

什么是定性研究中的三角测量？

Triangulation. refers to the use of several approaches in a study to comprehensively understand phenomena. This method helps to increase the validity and credibility of research findings.
三角测量是指在研究中使用多种方法来全面了解现象。这种方法有助于提高研究结果的有效性和可信度。

Types of triangulation include method triangulation (using multiple methods to gather data); investigator triangulation (multiple researchers for collecting/ analyzing data), theory triangulation (comparing several theoretical perspectives to explain a phenomenon), and data source triangulation (using data from various times, locations, and people; Carter et al., 2014).
三角测量的类型包括方法三角测量（使用多种方法收集数据）;调查员三角测量（多个研究人员收集/分析数据）、理论三角测量（比较几个理论观点以解释现象）和数据源三角测量（使用来自不同时间、地点和人员的数据;Carter et al.， 2014）。

Why is qualitative research important?

为什么定性研究很重要？

Qualitative research allows researchers to describe and explain the social world. The exploratory nature of qualitative research helps to generate hypotheses that can then be tested quantitatively.
定性研究使研究人员能够描述和解释社会世界。定性研究的探索性有助于产生假设，然后可以对其进行定量检验。

In qualitative research, participants are able to express their thoughts, experiences, and feelings without constraint.
在定性研究中，参与者能够不受限制地表达他们的想法、经历和感受。

Additionally, researchers are able to follow up on participants’ answers in real-time, generating valuable discussion around a topic. This enables researchers to gain a nuanced understanding of phenomena which is difficult to attain using quantitative methods.
此外，研究人员能够实时跟进参与者的答案，围绕某个主题产生有价值的讨论。这使研究人员能够对现象有细致入微的理解，这是使用定量方法难以实现的。

What is coding data in qualitative research?

什么是定性研究中的数据编码？

Coding data is a qualitative data analysis strategy. in which a section of text is assigned with a label that describes its content.
编码数据是一种定性数据分析策略，其中为一段文本分配一个描述其内容的标签。

These labels may be words or phrases which represent important (and recurring) patterns in the data.
这些标签可能是表示数据中重要（和重复出现的）模式的单词或短语。

This process enables researchers to identify related content across the dataset. Codes can then be used to group similar types of data to generate themes.
此过程使研究人员能够识别数据集中的相关内容。然后，可以使用代码对类似类型的数据进行分组以生成主题。

What is the difference between qualitative and quantitative research?

定性研究和定量研究有什么区别？

Qualitative research involves the collection and analysis of non-numerical data in order to understand experiences and meanings from the participant’s perspective.
定性研究涉及非数字数据的收集和分析，以便从参与者的角度理解体验和意义。

This can provide rich, in-depth insights on complicated phenomena. Qualitative data may be collected using interviews, focus groups, or observations.
这可以提供对复杂现象的丰富、深入的见解。定性数据可以通过访谈、焦点小组或观察来收集。

In contrast, quantitative research involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to measure the frequency, magnitude, or relationships of variables. This can provide objective and reliable evidence that can be generalized to the wider population.
相比之下，定量研究涉及数值数据的收集和分析，以衡量变量的频率、幅度或关系。这可以提供客观可靠的证据，可以推广到更广泛的人群。

Quantitative data may be collected using closed-ended questionnaires or experiments.
可以使用封闭式问卷或实验收集定量数据。

What is trustworthiness in qualitative research?

什么是定性研究中的可信度？

Trustworthiness is a concept used to assess the quality and rigor of qualitative research. Four criteria are used to assess a study’s trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability.
可信度是用于评估定性研究的质量和严谨性的概念。四个标准用于评估研究的可信度：可信度、可转移性、可靠性和可确认性。

Credibility refers to how accurately the results represent the reality and viewpoints of the participants. Transferability refers to whether the findings may be applied to another context, setting, or group.
可信度是指结果代表参与者的现实和观点的准确程度。可转移性是指调查结果是否可以应用于其他环境、环境或组。

Dependability is the extent to which the findings are consistent and reliable. Confirmability refers to the objectivity of findings (not influenced by the bias or assumptions of researchers).
可靠性是调查结果的一致性和可靠性的程度。可确认性是指研究结果的客观性（不受研究人员的偏见或假设的影响）。

What is data saturation in qualitative research?

什么是定性研究中的数据饱和度？

Data saturation is a methodological principle used to guide the sample size of a qualitative research study.
数据饱和度是用于指导定性研究样本量的方法论原则。

Data saturation is proposed as a necessary methodological component in qualitative research (Saunders et al., 2018) as it is a vital criterion for discontinuing data collection and/or analysis.
数据饱和度被提议作为定性研究中必要的方法论组成部分（Saunders et al.， 2018），因为它是停止数据收集和/或分析的重要标准。

The intention of data saturation is to find “no new data, no new themes, no new coding, and ability to replicate the study” (Guest et al., 2006). Therefore, enough data has been gathered to make conclusions.
数据饱和的目的是发现“没有新数据，没有新主题，没有新的编码，并且能够复制研究”（Guest et al.， 2006）。因此，已经收集了足够的数据来得出结论。

Why is sampling in qualitative research important?

为什么定性研究中抽样很重要？

In quantitative research, large sample sizes are used to provide statistically significant quantitative estimates.
在定量研究中，大样本量用于提供具有统计意义的定量估计。

This is because quantitative research aims to provide generalizable conclusions that represent populations.
这是因为定量研究旨在提供代表人群的可推广结论。

However, the aim of sampling in qualitative research is to gather data that will help the researcher understand the depth, complexity, variation, or context of a phenomenon. The small sample sizes in qualitative studies support the depth of case-oriented analysis.
然而，定性研究中抽样的目的是收集数据，帮助研究人员了解现象的深度、复杂性、变化或背景。定性研究中的小样本量支持以案例为导向的分析的深度。

What is narrative analysis?

什么是叙事分析？

Narrative analysis. is a qualitative research method used to understand how individuals create stories from their personal experiences.
叙事分析是一种定性研究方法，用于了解个人如何从他们的个人经历中创作故事。

There is an emphasis on understanding the context in which a narrative is constructed, recognizing the influence of historical, cultural, and social factors on storytelling.
强调理解构建叙事的背景，认识到历史、文化和社会因素对讲故事的影响。

Researchers can use different methods together to explore a research question.
研究人员可以一起使用不同的方法来探索研究问题。

Some narrative researchers focus on the content of what is said, using thematic narrative analysis, while others focus on the structure, such as holistic-form or categorical-form structural narrative analysis. Others focus on how the narrative is produced and performed.
一些叙事研究人员使用主题叙事分析专注于所说的内容，而另一些则侧重于结构，例如整体形式或分类形式的结构叙述分析。其他研究则侧重于叙事是如何产生和执行的。

Grounded Theory vs. Thematic Analysis: What’s the Difference?.

扎根理论与主题分析：有什么区别？

Grounded theory (GT) aims to develop a new theory grounded in data, while thematic analysis (TA) focuses on identifying patterns of meaning (themes).
扎根理论 （GT） 旨在发展一种基于数据的新理论，而主题分析 （TA） 则侧重于识别意义模式（主题）。

GT uses a systematic and iterative coding process, including theoretical sampling and constant comparative analysis to reach theoretical saturation.
GT 使用系统和迭代编码过程，包括理论抽样和常数比较分析，以达到理论饱和。

References

Boeije, H. (2014). Analysis in qualitative research. Sage.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brooks, J., McCluskey, S., Turley, E., & King, N. (2014). The utility of template analysis in qualitative psychology research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), 202–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.955224

Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological research and practice, 2(1), 14-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z

Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology nursing forum, 41(5), 545–547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. (2018). CASP Checklist: 10 questions to help you make sense of a Qualitative research. https://casp-uk.net/images/checklist/documents/CASP-Qualitative-Studies-Checklist/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018_fillable_form.pdf Accessed: March 15 2023

Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Successful Qualitative Research, 1-400.

Denny, E., & Weckesser, A. (2022). How to do qualitative research?: Qualitative research methods. BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 129(7), 1166-1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17150

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). The discovery of grounded theory. The Discovery of Grounded Theory, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206-1

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. doi:10.1177/1525822X05279903

Halpren, E. S. (1983). Auditing naturalistic inquiries: The development and application of a model (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington.

Hammarberg, K., Kirkman, M., & de Lacey, S. (2016). Qualitative research methods: When to use them and how to judge them. Human Reproduction, 31(3), 498–501. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev334

Koch, T. (1994). Establishing rigour in qualitative research: The decision trail. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, 976–986. doi:10.1111/ j.1365-2648.1994.tb01177.x

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Mays, N., & Pope, C. (2000). Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ, 320(7226), 50–52.

Minichiello, V. (1990). In-Depth Interviewing: Researching People. Longman Cheshire.

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Petty, N. J., Thomson, O. P., & Stew, G. (2012). Ready for a paradigm shift? part 2: Introducing qualitative research methodologies and methods. Manual Therapy, 17(5), 378–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2012.03.004

Punch, K. F. (2013). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage

Reeves, S., Kuper, A., & Hodges, B. D. (2008). Qualitative research methodologies: Ethnography. BMJ, 337(aug07 3). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1020

Russell, C. K., & Gregory, D. M. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative research studies. Evidence Based Nursing, 6(2), 36–40.

Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

Scarduzio, J. A. (2017). Emic approach to qualitative research. The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0082

Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice / Margrit Schreier.

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22, 63–75.

Starks, H., & Trinidad, S. B. (2007). Choose your method: a comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qualitative health research, 17(10), 1372–1380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307307031

Tenny, S., Brannan, J. M., & Brannan, G. D. (2022). Qualitative Study. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing.

Tobin, G. A., & Begley, C. M. (2004). Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48, 388–396. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03207.x

Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & health sciences, 15(3), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048

Wood L. A., Kroger R. O. (2000). Doing discourse analysis: Methods for studying action in talk and text. Sage.

Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Traditions: epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European journal of education, 48(2), 311-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12014

Lauren McCall

MSc Health Psychology Graduate

MSc, Health Psychology, University of Nottingham

---

Grounded Theory In Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide

定性研究中的扎根理论：实用指南

By Saul McLeod, PhD Updated on June 13, 2024
Reviewed by Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

On This Page:

Grounded theory is a useful approach when you want to develop a new theory based on real-world data Instead of starting with a pre-existing theory, grounded theory lets the data guide the development of your theory.
当您想根据真实世界数据开发新理论时，扎根理论是一种有用的方法扎根理论，而不是从预先存在的理论开始，而是让数据指导您的理论的发展。

What Is Grounded Theory?

什么是扎根理论？

Grounded theory is a qualitative method. specifically designed to inductively generate theory from data. It was developed by Glaser and Strauss in 1967.
扎根理论是一种定性方法，专门用于从数据中归纳生成理论。它由 Glaser 和 Strauss 于 1967 年开发。

• Data shapes the theory: Instead of trying to prove an existing theory, you let the data guide your findings.
  数据塑造理论：您不是试图证明现有理论，而是让数据指导您的发现。
• No guessing games: You don’t start with assumptions or try to confirm your own biases.
  不要猜谜游戏：你不会从假设开始或试图确认你自己的偏见。
• Data collection and analysis happen together: You analyze information as you gather it, which helps you decide what data to collect next.
  数据收集和分析同时进行：您在收集信息时对其进行分析，这有助于您决定接下来要收集哪些数据。

It is important to note that grounded theory is an inductive approach where a theory is developed from collected real-world data rather than trying to prove or disprove a hypothesis like in a deductive scientific approach
重要的是要注意，扎根理论是一种归纳方法，其中理论是从收集的真实世界数据中发展而来的，而不是像演绎科学方法那样试图证明或反驳假设

You gather information, look for patterns, and use those patterns to develop an explanation.
您收集信息，寻找模式，并使用这些模式来制定解释。

It is a way to understand why people do things and how those actions create patterns. Imagine you’re trying to figure out why your friends love a certain video game.
这是一种理解人们为什么做事以及这些行为如何创造模式的方法。想象一下，你正试图弄清楚为什么你的朋友喜欢某个视频游戏。

Instead of asking an adult, you observe your friends while they’re playing, listen to them talk about it, and maybe even play a little yourself. By studying their actions and words, you’re using grounded theory to build an understanding of their behavior.
与其问成年人，不如观察你的朋友在玩，听他们谈论它，甚至可能自己玩一点。通过研究他们的行为和言语，您正在使用扎根理论来建立对他们行为的理解。

This qualitative method of research focuses on real-life experiences and observations, letting theories emerge naturally from the data collected, like piecing together a puzzle without knowing the final image.
这种定性研究方法侧重于现实生活中的经验和观察，让理论从收集的数据中自然而然地浮现出来，就像在不知道最终图像的情况下拼凑一个拼图一样。

When should you use grounded theory?

什么时候应该使用扎根理论？

Grounded theory research is useful for beginning researchers, particularly graduate students, because it offers a clear and flexible framework for conducting a study on a new topic.
扎根理论研究对初级研究人员，尤其是研究生很有用，因为它为对新主题进行研究提供了一个清晰而灵活的框架。

Grounded theory works best when existing theories are either insufficient or nonexistent for the topic at hand.
当现有理论对于手头的主题来说不足或不存在时，扎根理论效果最好。

Since grounded theory is a continuously evolving process, researchers collect and analyze data until theoretical saturation is reached or no new insights can be gained.
由于扎根理论是一个不断发展的过程，研究人员收集和分析数据，直到达到理论饱和或无法获得新的见解。

What is the final product of a GT study?

GT 研究的最终结果是什么？

The final product of a grounded theory (GT) study is an integrated and comprehensive grounded theory that explains a process or scheme associated with a phenomenon.
扎根理论 （GT） 研究的最终产品是一个综合和全面的扎根理论，它解释了与现象相关的过程或方案。

The quality of a GT study is judged on whether it produces this middle-range theory
GT 研究的质量是根据它是否产生这个中间范围理论来判断的

Middle-range theories are sort of like explanations that focus on a specific part of society or a particular event. They don’t try to explain everything in the world. Instead, they zero in on things happening in certain groups, cultures, or situations.
中程理论有点像专注于社会特定部分或特定事件的解释。他们不会试图解释世界上的一切。相反，他们专注于某些群体、文化或情况下发生的事情。

Think of it like this: a grand theory is like trying to understand all of weather at once, but a middle-range theory is like focusing on how hurricanes form.
可以这样想：宏大理论就像试图同时了解所有天气，但中程理论就像关注飓风是如何形成的。

Here are a few examples of what middle-range theories might try to explain:

以下是中间范围理论可能试图解释的几个例子：

• How people deal with feeling anxious in social situations.
  人们如何处理社交场合的焦虑感。
• How people act and interact at work.
  人们在工作中的行为和互动方式。
• How teachers handle students who are misbehaving in class.
  教师如何处理课堂上行为不端的学生。

Core Components of Grounded Theory

扎根理论的核心组成部分

This terminology reflects the iterative, inductive, and comparative nature of grounded theory, which distinguishes it from other research approaches.
这个术语反映了扎根理论的迭代、归纳和比较性质，这使它与其他研究方法区分开来。

• Theoretical Sampling: The researcher uses theoretical sampling to choose new participants or data sources based on the emerging findings of their study. The goal is to gather data that will help to further develop and refine the emerging categories and theoretical concepts.
  理论抽样：研究人员使用理论抽样，根据他们研究的新发现来选择新的参与者或数据源。目标是收集有助于进一步开发和完善新兴类别和理论概念的数据。
• Theoretical Sensitivity: Researchers need to be aware of their preconceptions going into a study and understand how those preconceptions could influence the research. However, it is not possible to completely separate a researcher’s history and experience from the construction of a theory.
  理论敏感性：研究人员需要了解他们在进行研究时的先入之见，并了解这些先入之见如何影响研究。然而，不可能将研究人员的历史和经验与理论的构建完全分开。
• Coding: Coding is the process of analyzing qualitative data. (usually text) by assigning labels (codes) to chunks of data that capture their essence or meaning. It allows you to condense, organize and interpret your data.
  编码：编码是通过为捕获其本质或含义的数据块分配标签（代码）来分析定性数据（通常是文本）的过程。它允许您压缩、组织和解释您的数据。
• Core Category: The core category encapsulates and explains the grounded theory as a whole. Researchers identify a core category to focus on during the later stages of their research.
  核心类别：核心类别概括并解释整个扎根理论。研究人员确定在研究后期需要关注的核心类别。
• Memos: Researchers use memos to record their thoughts and ideas about the data, explore relationships between codes and categories, and document the development of the emerging grounded theory. Memos support the development of theory by tracking emerging themes and patterns.
  备忘录：研究人员使用备忘录来记录他们对数据的想法和想法，探索代码和类别之间的关系，并记录新兴扎根理论的发展。备忘录通过跟踪新出现的主题和模式来支持理论的发展。
• Theoretical Saturation: This term refers to the point in a grounded theory study when collecting additional data does not yield any new theoretical insights. The researcher continues the process of collecting and analyzing data until theoretical saturation is reached.
  理论饱和：该术语是指在扎根理论研究中收集额外数据不会产生任何新的理论见解的时间点。研究人员继续收集和分析数据，直到达到理论饱和。
• Constant Comparative Analysis: This method involves the systematic comparison of data points, codes, and categories as they emerge from the research process. Researchers use constant comparison to identify patterns and connections in their data.
  常数比较分析： 这种方法涉及对研究过程中出现的数据点、代码和类别进行系统比较。研究人员使用不断比较来识别数据中的模式和联系。

Versions

版本

Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss first introduced grounded theory in 1967 in their book, The Discovery of Grounded Theory.
Barney Glaser 和 Anselm Strauss 于 1967 年在他们的著作《扎根理论的发现》中首次引入了扎根理论。

Their aim was to create a research method that prioritized real-world data to understand social behavior.
他们的目标是创建一种研究方法，优先考虑真实世界的数据来了解社会行为。

However, their approaches diverged over time, leading to two distinct versions: Glaserian and Straussian grounded theory.
然而，随着时间的推移，他们的方法出现了分歧，导致了两个不同的版本：格拉泽理论和施特劳斯扎根理论。

The different versions of grounded theory diverge in their approaches to coding., theory construction, and the use of literature.
扎根理论的不同版本在编码、理论构建和文学使用的方法上有所不同。

All versions of grounded theory share the goal of generating a middle-range theory that explains a social process or phenomenon.
所有版本的扎根理论都有一个共同的目标，即产生一个解释社会过程或现象的中间理论。

They also emphasize the importance of theoretical sampling, constant comparative analysis, and theoretical saturation in developing a robust theory
他们还强调了理论抽样、恒定比较分析和理论饱和度在发展稳健理论中的重要性

Glaserian Grounded Theory Glaserian

扎根理论

Glaserian grounded theory emphasizes the emergence of theory from data and discourages the use of pre-existing literature.
Glaserian 扎根理论强调理论从数据中出现，不鼓励使用预先存在的文献。

Glaser believed that adopting a specific philosophical or disciplinary perspective reduces the broader potential of grounded theory.
Glaser 认为，采用特定的哲学或学科观点会降低扎根理论的更广泛潜力。

For Glaser, prior understandings should be based on the general problem area and reading very wide to alert or sensitize one to a wide range of possibilities.
对于 Glaser 来说，先前的理解应该基于一般的问题领域和非常广泛的阅读，以提醒或敏感于各种可能性。

It prioritizes parsimony, scope, and modifiability in the resulting theory
它在生成的理论中优先考虑精简性、范围和可修改性

Straussian Grounded Theory

施特劳斯扎根理论

Strauss and Corbin (1990) focused on developing the analytic techniques and providing guidance to novice researchers.
Strauss 和 Corbin （1990） 专注于开发分析技术并为新手研究人员提供指导。

Straussian grounded theory utilizes a more structured approach to coding and analysis and acknowledges the role of the literature in shaping research.
施特劳斯的扎根理论采用更结构化的编码和分析方法，并承认文献在塑造研究方面的作用。

It acknowledges the role of deduction and validation in addition to induction.
它承认除了归纳之外，演绎和验证的作用。

Strauss and Corbin also emphasize the use of unstructured interview questions to encourage participants to speak freely
Strauss 和 Corbin 还强调使用非结构化的访谈问题来鼓励参与者自由发言

Critics of this approach believe it produced a rigidity never intended for grounded theory.
这种方法的批评者认为，它产生了一种从未打算用于扎根理论的僵化。

Constructivist Grounded Theory

建构主义扎根理论

This version, primarily associated with Charmaz, recognizes that knowledge is situated, partial, provisional, and socially constructed. It emphasizes abstract and conceptual understandings rather than explanations.
这个版本主要与 Charmaz 有关，它承认知识是情境的、部分的、临时的和社会建构的。它强调抽象和概念的理解，而不是解释。

Kathy Charmaz expanded on original versions of GT, emphasizing the researcher’s role in interpreting findings
Kathy Charmaz 扩展了 GT 的原始版本，强调了研究人员在解释研究结果方面的作用

Constructivist grounded theory acknowledges the researcher’s influence on the research process and the co-creation of knowledge with participants
建构主义扎根理论承认研究人员对研究过程的影响以及与参与者共同创造知识

Situational Analysis

情境分析

Developed by Clarke, this version builds upon Straussian and Constructivist grounded theory and incorporates postmodern., poststructuralist, and posthumanist perspectives.
该版本由克拉克开发，建立在施特劳斯和建构主义的基础理论之上，并融合了后现代、后结构主义和后人类主义的观点。

Situational analysis incorporates postmodern perspectives and considers the role of nonhuman actors
情境分析融合了后现代视角并考虑了非人类行为者的作用

It introduces the method of mapping to analyze complex situations and emphasizes both human and nonhuman elements.
它介绍了用于分析复杂情况的地图绘制方法，并强调人类和非人类元素。

Benefits

好处

• Discover New Insights: Grounded theory lets you uncover new theories based on what your data reveals, not just on pre-existing ideas.
  发现新见解：扎根理论可让您根据数据揭示的内容发现新理论，而不仅仅是基于预先存在的想法。
• Data-Driven Results: Your conclusions are firmly rooted in the data you’ve gathered, ensuring they reflect reality. This close relationship between data and findings is a key factor in establishing trustworthiness.
  数据驱动的结果：您的结论深深植根于您收集的数据中，确保它们反映现实。数据和结果之间的这种密切关系是建立可信度的关键因素。
• Avoids Bias: Because gathering data and analyzing it are closely intertwined, researchers are truly observing what emerges from data, and are less likely to let their preconceptions color the findings.
  避免偏见：因为收集数据和分析数据是紧密交织在一起的，所以研究人员真正观察了数据中出现的内容，并且不太可能让他们的先入之见影响了研究结果。
• Streamlined data gathering and analysis: Analyzing and collecting data go hand in hand. Data is collected, analyzed, and as you gain insight from analysis, you continue gathering more data.
  简化数据收集和分析：分析和收集数据齐头并进。收集和分析数据，当您从分析中获得见解时，您会继续收集更多数据。
• Synthesize Findings: By applying grounded theory to a qualitative metasynthesis, researchers can move beyond a simple aggregation of findings and generate a higher-level understanding of the phenomena being studied.
  综合结果：通过将扎根理论应用于定性元综合，研究人员可以超越简单的结果聚合，并对所研究的现象产生更高层次的理解。

Limitations

局限性

• Time-Consuming: Analyzing qualitative data can be like searching for a needle in a haystack; it requires careful examination and can be quite time-consuming, especially without software assistance6.
  耗时： 分析定性数据就像大海捞针一样;它需要仔细检查并且可能非常耗时，尤其是在没有软件帮助的情况下6。
• Potential for Bias: Despite safeguards, researchers may unintentionally influence their analysis due to personal experiences.
  潜在的偏见： 尽管有保护措施，但由于个人经历，研究人员可能会无意中影响他们的分析。
• Data Quality: The success of grounded theory hinges on complete and accurate data; poor quality can lead to faulty conclusions.
  数据质量：扎根理论的成功取决于完整和准确的数据;质量差会导致错误的结论。

Practical Steps

实际作步骤

Grounded theory can be conducted by individual researchers or research teams. If working in a team, it’s important to communicate regularly and ensure everyone is using the same coding system.
扎根理论可以由个人研究人员或研究团队进行。如果在团队中工作，定期沟通并确保每个人都使用相同的编码系统非常重要。

Grounded theory research is typically an iterative process. This means that researchers may move back and forth between these steps as they collect and analyze data.
扎根理论研究通常是一个迭代过程。这意味着研究人员在收集和分析数据时可能会在这些步骤之间来回切换。

Instead of doing everything in order, you repeat the steps over and over.
您不是按顺序做所有事情，而是一遍又一遍地重复这些步骤。

This cycle keeps going, which is why grounded theory is called a circular process.
这个循环不断进行，这就是为什么扎根理论被称为循环过程。

Continue to gather and analyze data until no new insights or properties related to your categories emerge. This saturation point signals that the theory is comprehensive and well-substantiated by the data.
继续收集和分析数据，直到没有出现与您的类别相关的新见解或属性。这个饱和点表明该理论是全面的，并且有数据充分证实。

Theoretical sampling, collecting sufficient and rich data, and theoretical saturation help the grounded theorist to avoid a lack of “groundedness,” incomplete findings, and “premature closure.
理论抽样、收集足够和丰富的数据以及理论饱和度有助于扎根的理论家避免缺乏“扎根性”、不完整的发现和“过早结束”。

Source: Choi, Y. J., Choi, H. B., & O’Donnell, M. (2018). Disaster reintegration model: a qualitative analysis on developing Korean disaster mental health support model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(2), 362.

1. Planning and Philosophical Considerations

1. 规划和哲学考虑

Begin by considering the phenomenon you want to study and assess the current knowledge surrounding it.
首先考虑你想要研究的现象，并评估围绕它的当前知识。

However, refrain from detailing the specific aspects you seek to uncover about the phenomenon to prevent pre-existing assumptions from skewing the research.
但是，请勿详细说明您试图揭示的有关该现象的具体方面，以防止先前存在的假设扭曲研究。

• Discern a personal philosophical position. Before beginning a research study, it is important to consider your philosophical stance and how you view the world, including the nature of reality and the relationship between the researcher and the participant. This will inform the methodological choices made throughout the study.
  辨别个人的哲学立场。在开始一项研究之前，重要的是要考虑你的哲学立场和你如何看待世界，包括现实的本质以及研究人员与参与者之间的关系。这将为整个研究过程中所做的方法选择提供信息。
• Investigate methodological possibilities. Explore different research methods that align with both the philosophical stance and research goals of the study.
  研究方法的可能性。探索与研究的哲学立场和研究目标相一致的不同研究方法。
• Plan the study. Determine the research question, how to collect data, and from whom to collect data.
  规划研究。确定研究问题、如何收集数据以及从谁那里收集数据。
• Conduct a literature review. The literature review is an ongoing process throughout the study. It is important to avoid duplicating existing research and to consider previous studies, concepts, and interpretations that relate to the emerging codes and categories in the developing grounded theory.
  进行文献综述。文献综述是整个研究过程中的一个持续过程。重要的是要避免重复现有的研究，并考虑与发展中的扎根理论中新兴的密码和类别相关的先前研究、概念和解释。

2. Recruit participants using theoretical sampling

2. 使用理论抽样招募参与者

Initially, select participants who are readily available (convenience sampling.) or those recommended by existing participants (snowball sampling.).
最初，选择现成的参与者（便利抽样）或现有参与者推荐的参与者（雪球抽样）。

As the analysis progresses, transition to theoretical sampling, involving the deliberate selection of participants and data sources to refine your emerging theory.
随着分析的进行，过渡到理论抽样，包括精心选择参与者和数据源，以完善您的新兴理论。

This method is used to refine and develop a grounded theory. The researcher uses theoretical sampling to choose new participants or data sources based on the emerging findings of their study.

This could mean recruiting participants who can shed light on gaps in your understanding uncovered during the initial data analysis.
这可能意味着招募能够阐明您在初始数据分析中发现的理解差距的参与者。

Theoretical sampling guides further data collection by identifying participants or data sources that can provide insights into gaps in the emerging theory
理论抽样通过识别参与者或数据源来指导进一步的数据收集，这些参与者或数据源可以提供对新兴理论中差距的见解

The goal is to gather data that will help to further develop and refine the emerging categories and theoretical concepts.
目标是收集有助于进一步开发和完善新兴类别和理论概念的数据。

Theoretical sampling starts early in a GT study and generally requires the researcher to make amendments to their ethics approvals to accommodate new participant groups.
理论抽样从 GT 研究的早期开始，通常需要研究人员修改其伦理批准以适应新的参与者群体。

3. Collect Data

3. 收集数据

The researcher might use interviews, focus groups, observations, or a combination of methods to collect qualitative data.
研究人员可能会使用访谈、焦点小组、观察或多种方法的组合来收集定性数据。

• Observations: Watching and recording phenomena as they occur. Can be participant (researcher actively involved) or non-participant (researcher tries not to influence behaviors), and covert (participants unaware) or overt (participants aware).
  观察：观察和记录现象的发生。可以是参与者 （研究人员积极参与） 或非参与者 （研究人员尽量不影响行为），也可以是隐蔽的 （参与者不知道） 或公开的 （参与者意识到）。
• Interviews: One-on-one conversations to understand participants’ experiences. Can be structured (predetermined questions), informal (casual conversations), or semi-structured (flexible structure to explore emerging issues).
  访谈：一对一对话以了解参与者的经历。可以是结构化的（预先确定的问题）、非正式的（随意的对话）或半结构化的（探索新出现的问题的灵活结构）。
• Focus groups: Dynamic discussions with 4-10 participants sharing characteristics, moderated by the researcher using a topic guide.
  焦点小组：由 4-10 名参与者分享特征的动态讨论，由研究人员使用主题指南主持。
• Ethnography: Studying a group’s behaviors and social interactions in their environment through observations, field notes, and interviews. Researchers immerse themselves in the community or organization for an in-depth understanding.
  民族志：通过观察、实地笔记和访谈来研究一个群体在其环境中的行为和社会互动。研究人员沉浸在社区或组织中，以深入了解。

4. Begin open coding as soon as data collection starts

4. 数据收集开始后立即开始开放编码

Open coding. is the first stage of coding in grounded theory, where you carefully examine and label segments of your data to identify initial concepts and ideas.
开放编码是扎根理论编码的第一阶段，在该阶段，您可以仔细检查和标记数据片段，以确定初始概念和想法。

This process involves scrutinizing the data and creating codes grounded in the data itself.
此过程包括仔细检查数据并创建基于数据本身的代码。

The initial codes stay close to the data, aiming to capture and summarize critically and analytically what is happening in the data
初始代码靠近数据，旨在批判性地和分析性地捕获和总结数据中发生的事情

To begin open coding, read through your data, such as interview transcripts, to gain a comprehensive understanding of what is being conveyed.
要开始开放式编码，请通读您的数据，例如采访记录，以全面了解所传达的内容。

As you encounter segments of data that represent a distinct idea, concept, or action, you assign a code to that segment. These codes act as descriptive labels summarizing the meaning of the data segment.
当您遇到表示不同想法、概念或作的数据段时，您可以为该段分配一个代码。这些代码充当描述性标签，用于汇总数据细分的含义。

For instance, if you were analyzing interview data about experiences with a new medication, a segment of data might describe a participant’s difficulty sleeping after taking the medication. This segment could be labeled with the code “trouble sleeping”
例如，如果您正在分析有关使用新药体验的访谈数据，则一段数据可能会描述参与者在服药后难以入睡。此段可以用代码 “trouble sleeping” 进行标记

Open coding is a crucial step in grounded theory because it allows you to break down the data into manageable units and begin to see patterns and themes emerge.
开放编码是扎根理论中的关键步骤，因为它允许您将数据分解为可管理的单元，并开始看到模式和主题的出现。

As you continue coding, you constantly compare different segments of data to refine your understanding of existing codes and identify new ones.
在继续编码时，您需要不断比较不同的数据段，以加深对现有代码的理解并识别新代码。

For instance, excerpts describing difficulties with sleep might be grouped under the code “trouble sleeping”.
例如，描述睡眠困难的摘录可能被归类为代码 “trouble sleeping”。

This iterative process of comparing data and refining codes helps ensure the codes accurately reflect the data.
这种比较数据和优化代码的迭代过程有助于确保代码准确反映数据。

Open coding is about staying close to the data, using in vivo terms or gerunds to maintain a sense of action and process
开放编码是关于贴近数据，使用 in vivo 术语或动名词来保持行动感和过程感

5. Reflect on thoughts and contradictions by writing grounded theory memos during analysis

5. 在分析过程中通过撰写扎根的理论备忘录来反思想法和矛盾

During open coding, it’s crucial to engage in memo writing.. Memos serve as your “notes to self”, allowing you to reflect on the coding process, note emerging patterns, and ask analytical questions about the data.
在开放编码期间，参与备忘录写作至关重要。备忘录充当您的“自我笔记”，让您反思编码过程、记录新出现的模式并提出有关数据的分析问题。

Document your thoughts, questions, and insights in memos throughout the research process.
在整个研究过程中，将您的想法、问题和见解记录在备忘录中。

These memos serve multiple purposes: tracing your thought process, promoting reflexivity (self-reflection), facilitating collaboration if working in a team, and supporting theory development.
这些备忘录有多种用途：追踪您的思维过程、促进反身性（自我反省）、在团队中工作时促进协作以及支持理论发展。

Early memos tend to be shorter and less conceptual, often serving as “preparatory” notes. Later memos become more analytical and conceptual as the research progresses.
早期的备忘录往往更短，概念性更弱，通常用作“准备”笔记。随着研究的进展，后来的备忘录变得更加具有分析和概念性。

Memo Writing

备忘录撰写

• Reflexivity and Recognizing Assumptions: Researchers should acknowledge the influence of their own experiences and assumptions. on the research process. Articulating these assumptions, perhaps through memos, can enhance the transparency and trustworthiness of the study.
  反身性和识别假设：研究人员应该承认自己的经验和假设对研究过程的影响。阐明这些假设，也许通过备忘录，可以提高研究的透明度和可信度。
• Write memos throughout the research process. Memo writing. should occur throughout the entire research process, beginning with initial coding. Memos help make sense of the data and transition between coding phases.
  在整个研究过程中写备忘录。备忘录写作应贯穿整个研究过程，从初始编码开始。备忘录有助于理解数据和编码阶段之间的过渡。
• Ask analytic questions in early memos. Memos should include questions, reflections, and notes to explore in subsequent data collection and analysis.
  在早期的备忘录中提出分析问题。备忘录应包括问题、反思和注释，以便在后续的数据收集和分析中探索。
• Refine memos throughout the process. Early memos will be shorter and less conceptual, but will become longer and more developed in later stages of the research process. Later memos should begin to develop provisional categories.
  在整个过程中优化备忘录。早期的备忘录会更短、概念化更少，但在研究过程的后期阶段会变得更长、更成熟。以后的备忘录应该开始制定临时类别。

6. Group codes into categories using axial coding

6. 使用轴向编码将代码分组

Axial coding. is the process of identifying connections between codes, grouping them together into categories to reveal relationships within the data.
轴向编码是识别代码之间连接的过程，将它们分组为多个类别以揭示数据中的关系。

Axial coding seeks to find the axes that connect various codes together.
轴向编码旨在找到将各种代码连接在一起的轴。

For example, in research on school bullying, focused codes such as “Doubting oneself, getting low self-confidence, starting to agree with bullies” and “Getting lower self-confidence; blaming oneself” could be grouped together into a broader category representing the impact of bullying on self-perception.
例如，在对校园欺凌的研究中，重点关注诸如“怀疑自己，自信心低下，开始同意欺凌者”和“自信心降低;责备自己“可以归为一个更广泛的类别，代表霸凌对自我认知的影响。

Similarly, codes such as “Being left by friends” and “Avoiding school; feeling lonely and isolated” could be grouped into a category related to the social consequences of bullying.
同样，诸如“被朋友抛弃”和“逃学;感到孤独和孤立“可以归入与欺凌的社会后果相关的类别。

These categories then become part of the emerging grounded theory, explaining the multifaceted aspects of the phenomenon.
然后，这些类别成为新兴的扎根理论的一部分，解释了该现象的多方面。

Qualitative data analysis software often represents these categories as nested codes, visually demonstrating the hierarchy and interconnectedness of the concepts.
定性数据分析软件通常将这些类别表示为嵌套代码，直观地展示概念的层次结构和相互关联性。

This hierarchical structure helps researchers organize their data, identify patterns, and develop a more nuanced understanding of the relationships between different aspects of the phenomenon being studied.
这种分层结构有助于研究人员组织他们的数据、识别模式，并对所研究现象的不同方面之间的关系有更细致的理解。

This process of axial coding is crucial for moving beyond descriptive accounts of the data towards a more theoretically rich and explanatory grounded theory.
这种轴向编码过程对于从数据的描述性描述转向理论更丰富和解释性更扎根的理论至关重要。

7. Define the core category using selective coding

7. 使用选择性编码定义核心类别

During selective coding., the final development stage of grounded theory analysis, a researcher focuses on developing a detailed and integrated theory by selecting a core category and connecting it to other categories developed during earlier coding stages.
在选择性编码期间，即扎根理论分析的最后发展阶段，研究人员通过选择一个核心类别并将其与早期编码阶段开发的其他类别联系起来，专注于开发一个详细和综合的理论。

The core category is the central concept that links together the various categories and subcategories identified in the data and forms the foundation of the emergent grounded theory.
核心类别是将数据中确定的各种类别和子类别连接在一起的中心概念，并构成了涌现扎根理论的基础。

This core category will encapsulate the main theme of your grounded theory, that encompasses and elucidates the overarching process or phenomenon under investigation.
这个核心类别将概括你的扎根理论的主题，它包含并阐明了正在研究的总体过程或现象。

This phase involves a concentrated effort to refine and integrate categories, ensuring they align with the core category and contribute to the overall explanatory power of the theory.
这个阶段涉及集中精力提炼和整合类别，确保它们与核心类别保持一致，并有助于理论的整体解释力。

The theory should comprehensively describe the process or scheme related to the phenomenon being studied.
该理论应全面描述与所研究现象相关的过程或方案。

Example

例

For example, in a study on school bullying, if the core category is “victimization journey,” the researcher would selectively code data related to different stages of this journey, the factors contributing to each stage, and the consequences of experiencing these stages.
例如，在一项关于校园欺凌的研究中，如果核心类别是“受害旅程”，研究人员会有选择地编码与该旅程的不同阶段相关的数据、导致每个阶段的因素以及经历这些阶段的后果。

This might involve analyzing how victims initially attribute blame, their coping mechanisms, and the long-term impact of bullying on their self-perception.
这可能涉及分析受害者最初如何归因于责备、他们的应对机制以及霸凌对他们自我认知的长期影响。

Continue collecting data and analyzing until you reach theoretical saturation

继续收集数据和分析，直到达到理论饱和

Selective coding focuses on developing and saturating this core category, leading to a cohesive and integrated theory.
选择性编码侧重于发展和饱和这一核心类别，从而形成一个有凝聚力和综合的理论。

Through selective coding, researchers aim to achieve theoretical saturation, meaning no new properties or insights emerge from further data analysis.
通过选择性编码，研究人员旨在实现理论饱和，这意味着进一步的数据分析不会产生新的属性或见解。

This signifies that the core category and its related categories are well-defined, and the connections between them are thoroughly explored.
这意味着核心类别及其相关类别定义明确，并且它们之间的联系得到了彻底的探索。

This rigorous process strengthens the trustworthiness of the findings by ensuring the theory is comprehensive and grounded in a rich dataset.
这个严格的过程通过确保理论全面并基于丰富的数据集来增强研究结果的可信度。

It’s important to note that while a grounded theory seeks to provide a comprehensive explanation, it remains grounded in the data.
重要的是要注意，虽然扎根的理论试图提供全面的解释，但它仍然以数据为基础。

The theory’s scope is limited to the specific phenomenon and context studied, and the researcher acknowledges that new data or perspectives might lead to modifications or refinements of the theory
该理论的范围仅限于所研究的特定现象和背景，研究人员承认新的数据或观点可能会导致对理论的修改或完善

• Constant Comparative Analysis: This method involves the systematic comparison of data points, codes, and categories as they emerge from the research process. Researchers use constant comparison to identify patterns and connections in their data. There are different methods for comparing excerpts from interviews, for example, a researcher can compare excerpts from the same person, or excerpts from different people. This process is ongoing and iterative, and it continues until the researcher has developed a comprehensive and well-supported grounded theory.
  常数比较分析： 这种方法涉及对研究过程中出现的数据点、代码和类别进行系统比较。研究人员使用不断比较来识别数据中的模式和联系。比较访谈摘录的方法不同，例如，研究人员可以比较同一人的摘录，也可以比较不同人的摘录。这个过程是持续的和迭代的，并且一直持续到研究人员开发出一个全面且有充分依据的扎根理论。
• Continue until reaching theoretical saturation: Continue to gather and analyze data until no new insights or properties related to your categories. This saturation point signals that the theory is comprehensive and well-substantiated by the data.
  继续，直到达到理论饱和：继续收集和分析数据，直到没有与您的类别相关的新洞察或属性。这个饱和点表明该理论是全面的，并且有数据充分证实。

8. Theoretical coding and model development

8. 理论编码和模型开发

Theoretical coding is a process in grounded theory where researchers use advanced abstractions, often from existing theories, to explain the relationships found in their data.
理论编码是扎根理论中的一个过程，研究人员使用高级抽象（通常来自现有理论）来解释数据中发现的关系。

Theoretical coding often occurs later in the research process and involves using existing theories to explain the connections between codes and categories.
理论编码通常发生在研究过程的后期，涉及使用现有理论来解释代码和类别之间的联系。

This process helps to strengthen the explanatory power of the grounded theory. Theoretical coding should not be confused with simply describing the data; instead, it aims to explain the phenomenon being studied, distinguishing grounded theory from purely descriptive research.
这个过程有助于加强扎根理论的解释力。理论编码不应与简单地描述数据相混淆;相反，它旨在解释正在研究的现象，将扎根理论与纯粹的描述性研究区分开来。

Using the developed codes, categories, and core category, create a model illustrating the process or phenomenon.
使用开发的代码、类别和核心类别，创建一个模型来说明过程或现象。

Here is some advice for novice researchers on how to apply theoretical coding:

以下是对新手研究人员如何应用理论编码的一些建议：

• Begin with data analysis: Don’t start with a pre-determined theory. Instead, allow the theory to emerge from your data through careful analysis and coding.
  从数据分析开始：不要从预先确定的理论开始。相反，通过仔细的分析和编码，让理论从你的数据中浮现出来。
• Use existing theories as a guide: While the theory should primarily emerge from your data, you can use existing theories from any discipline to help explain the connections you are seeing between your categories. This demonstrates how your research builds on established knowledge.
  使用现有理论作为指导：虽然理论应主要来自您的数据，但您可以使用任何学科的现有理论来帮助解释您看到的类别之间的联系。这表明您的研究如何建立在已建立的知识之上。
• Use Glaser’s coding families: Consider applying Glaser’s (1978) coding families in the later stages of analysis as a simple way to begin theoretical coding. Remember that your analysis should guide which theoretical codes are most appropriate.
  使用 Glaser 的编码系列：考虑在分析的后期阶段应用 Glaser （1978） 的编码系列，作为开始理论编码的简单方法。请记住，您的分析应指导哪些理论代码最合适。
• Keep it simple: Theoretical coding doesn’t need to be overly complex. Focus on finding an existing theory that effectively explains the relationships you have identified in your data.
  保持简单：理论编码不需要过于复杂。专注于寻找一种现有理论，以有效解释您在数据中识别的关系。
• Be transparent: Clearly articulate the existing theory you are using and how it explains the connections between your categories.
  保持透明： 清楚地阐明您正在使用的现有理论以及它如何解释您的类别之间的联系。
• Theoretical coding is an iterative process: Remain open to revising your chosen theoretical codes as your analysis deepens and your grounded theory evolves.
  理论编码是一个迭代过程：随着分析的深入和扎根理论的发展，对修改您选择的理论代码持开放态度。

9. Write your grounded theory

9. 写下你的扎根理论

Present your findings in a clear and accessible manner, ensuring the theory is rooted in the data and explains the relationships between the identified concepts and categories.
以清晰易懂的方式展示您的发现，确保理论植根于数据并解释已确定的概念和类别之间的关系。

The end product of this process is a well-defined, integrated grounded theory that explains a process or scheme related to the phenomenon studied.
这个过程的最终产品是一个定义明确的、综合的扎根理论，它解释了与所研究的现象相关的过程或方案。

• Develop a dissemination plan: Determine how to share the research findings with others.
  制定传播计划：确定如何与他人分享研究结果。
• Evaluate and implement: Reflect on the research process and quality of findings, then share findings with relevant audiences in service of making a difference in the world
  评估和实施：反思研究过程和研究结果的质量，然后与相关受众分享研究结果，以改变世界

Reading List

Grounded Theory Review: This is an international journal that publishes articles on grounded theory.

• Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). [Grounded theory: A practical guide](https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/37746/1/37746 Birks and Mills 2015 Front Pages.pdf). Sage.
• Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13, 3-21.
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide through Qualitative Analysis. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
• Clarke, A. E. (2003). Situational analyses: Grounded theory mapping after the postmodern turn. Symbolic interaction, 26(4), 553-576.
• Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. University of California.
• Glaser, B. G. (2005). The grounded theory perspective III: Theoretical coding. Sociology Press.
• Glaser, B. G., & Holton, J. (2004, May). Remodeling grounded theory. In Forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum: qualitative social research (Vol. 5, No. 2).
• Charmaz, K. (2012). The power and potential of grounded theory. Medical sociology online, 6(3), 2-15.
• Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1965). Awareness of dying. New Brunswick. NJ: Aldine. This was the first published grounded theory study
• Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge.
• Pidgeon, N., & Henwood, K. (1997). Using grounded theory in psychological research. In N. Hayes (Ed.), Doing qualitative analysis in psychology Press/Erlbaum (UK) Taylor & Francis.

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

---

via:

• What is grounded theory? | Evidence-Based Nursing
  https://ebn.bmj.com/content/19/2/34

• 10 Grounded Theory Examples (Qualitative Research Method)
  https://helpfulprofessor.com/grounded-theory-examples/

• Characteristics of Qualitative Research
  https://www.simplypsychology.org/qualitative-research-characteristics-design-methods-examples.html

• Grounded Theory In Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide
  https://www.simplypsychology.org/grounded-theory.html