DOCSLIB.ORG

Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons and Evaluative Criteria

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons and Evaluative Criteria © F. Enke Verlag Stuttgart Zeitschrift für Soziologie, Jg. 19, Heft 6, Dezember 1990, S. 418-427 Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons and Evaluative Criteria Juliet Corbin, Anselm Strauss Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California. N-631-Y San Francisco, CA 94143, U.S. A. Abstract: Using grounded theory as an example, this paper examines three methodological questions that are generally applicable to all qualitative methods. How should the usual scientific canons be reinterpreted for qualitative research? How should researchers report the procedures and canons used in their research? What evaluative criteria should be used in judging the research products? The basic argument we propose is that the criteria should be adapted to fit the procedures of the method. We demonstrate how we have done this with grounded theory and suggest criteria for evaluating studies done in this mode. We suggest that other qualitative researchers might be similarly specific about their procedures and evaluative criteria. In this paper1 we address three related methodolo­ 1. Grounded theory: Overview and Brief gical issues. How should the usual scientific canons Description of its Canons and Procedures be redefined for qualitative research in social science? How should qualitative researchers report Qualitative methods, like their quantitative cous­ the procedures and canons used in their research? ins, can be evaluated in terms of their canons and What evaluative criteria should be used in judging procedures only if these are made explicit. In this the products of particular studies? These products section, we describe those of grounded theory. are not all identical since researchers may variously (For a more detailed explanation of the method aim at producing rich descriptions, ethnographic see: Glaser/Strauss 1967; Glaser 1978; Strauss fact-finding accounts, narratives that yield Verste­ 1987: Strauss/Corbin 1990). First, however, we hen, theoretical analyses of particular phenomena, shall briefly note an issue well recognized by quali­ systematic theory, or politically intended con­ tative researchers. Qualitative studies (and re­ sciousness-raising documents. Presumably, re­ search proposals) are often judged by quantitative­ searchers who aim at such different goals will use ly-oriented readers; by many, though not all, this is at least somewhat different sets of procedures. If done in terms of quantitative canons. Some quali­ so, we should not judge these research results by tative researchers have, of course, maintained that exactly the same criteria. those canons are inappropriate to their work (Cf, Agar 1986; Guba 1981; Kirk/Miller 1986), and We will attempt to illuminate these methodological probably most believe these must at least be modi­ issues by demonstrating how we have redefined the fied to fit qualitative research. Grounded theorists criteria in light of the procedures of grounded share a conviction with many other qualitative theory methodology. To do this we have had to researchers that the usual canons of “good science” explicate some of its procedural steps. We con­ should be retained; but they require redefinition in clude the paper by offering a specific set of criteria order to fit the realities of qualitative research and for evaluating studies done in this mode. Our the complexities of social phenomena that they intent is to show how this can be done and to seek to understand. These scientific canons include challenge other qualitative researchers to take up significance, theory-observation compatibility, the task of spelling out their own procedures (Cf, generalizability, consistency, reproducibility, pre­ Miles/Huberman 1984: Manning 1987) and evalua­ cision, and verification (Cf, the succinct discussion tive criteria. in Gortner/Schultz 1988: 204).2 1 We wish to thank several colleagues (Kathy Charmaz, Adele Clarke, Uta Gerhardt, Barney Glaser, David Maines, Virginia Olesen, Leonard Schatzman, Joseph 2 These canons are so much taken for granted by physical Schneider, Hans-Georg Soeffner and Leigh Star) whose and biological scientists, that even philosophers of often detailed comments on earlier drafts appreciably science do not explicitly discuss most of them except for improved this paper by aiding us to clear up ambiguities verification, though other canons like precision, consis­ and even inconsistencies, and prevent possible misun­ tency, and relevance are certainly implicit; see Popper derstandings. 1959. Juliet Corbin/Anselm Strauss: Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons and Evaluative Criteria 419 The dangers that must be guarded against when ser/Strauss 1967: 161-184). Naturally, the investi­ using such terms lie in their positivistic connota­ gator will use the usual methods suggested in the tions. There is no reason to define or use those interview and field work literature to assure credi­ terms in accordance with the standards of quanti­ bility of respondents, and avoid biasing their re­ tative social researchers, any more than one would sponses as well as their observations (Guba 1981, strictly follow those of physical scientists. Every Hammersley/Atkinson 1983; Kirk/Miller 1986; mode of discovery develops its own standards - Johnson 1975). and canons and procedures for achieving them. What is important is that all of these are made 1.2 Brief Description of Canons and Procedures explicit. Below we shall explicate how this has been done for grounded theory research. As a preface to this section, we offer a cautionary note. When writing a detailed account about grounded theory procedures and canons, one runs 1.1 Overview the danger of being read as unduly formalistic, and Grounded theory derives its theoretical underpin­ perhaps somewhat sectarian. Yet these procedures nings from Pragmatism (Dewey 1925; Mead 1934) and canons must be taken seriously, otherwise a and Symbolic Interactionism (Park and Burgess researcher ends up - as have a number of them - 1921; Hughes 1971; Blumer 1969). Though one claiming to have used a grounded theory approach, need not subscribe to these philosophical and so­ when indeed they have used only some of its ciological orientations to use this method, it is procedures or have used them incorrectly. Each important to realize that two important principles researcher must tread a fine line between satisfying drawn from these traditions are built into it. The the suggested criteria and allowing procedural fle­ first principle pertains to change. Since phenome­ xibility in the face of inevitable contingencies en­ na are not conceived of as static but as continually countered during the life of an actual research changing in response to prevailing conditions, an project. However, to the extent that circumstances important component of the method is to build permit, it is the following of these procedures that change, through process, into the method. The gives a project rigor. second and related principle pertains to a clear 1. Data collection and analysis are interrelated stand on the issue of “determinism”. Strict deter­ processes. In grounded theory, the analysis begins minism is rejected, as is nondeterminism. Rather, as soon as the first bit of data is collected. In actors are seen as having, though not always utiliz­ contrast, it is not uncommon for some qualitative ing, the means of controlling their destinies by researchers to collect much of their data prior to their responses to conditions. They are able to beginning systematic analysis. While this may work make choices according to perceived options. Both well with other modes of qualitative research, it Pragmatism and Symbolic Interactionism share violates the basic foundations of this method. this stance. Thus, grounded theory seeks not only Here, analysis is necessary at the outset of a study to uncover relevant conditions but also to deter­ because it directs the next interviews and observa­ mine how the actors under investigation actively tions. This is not equivalent to saying that there is respond to those conditions, and to the consequen­ no standardization of data collection. Each investi­ ces of their actions. It is the researcher’s responsi­ gator enters the field with some questions or areas bility to catch this interplay. This approach is ne­ for observation, or will soon generate them, and cessary whether the focus of a study is microscopic will collect data on these throughout the research in scope, say of workers’ interactions in a laborato­ endeavor, unless these questions prove during ry, or as macroscopic as a study of the health analysis to be irrelevant. However, in order not to industry or of the AIDS policy arena. miss anything that may be salient to the area under As in other qualitative approaches, the data for a study, the investigator must analyze those first bits grounded theory can come from various sources. of data for cues, and incorporate all seemingly The data collection procedures involve interviews relevant issues into the next set of interviews and and observations, in addition to other usual observations. sources including: government documents, video Systemically and sequentially carrying out the pro­ tapes, newspapers, letters, and books - anything cedures of data collection and analysis expands the that might shed light on the area of questions research process to capture all potentially relevant under study. Each of these can be coded in the aspects as soon as they are perceived. This process same way as interviews or observations
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Methods Exam Reading List August 2016 Creswell
    Methods Exam Reading List August 2016 Creswell, John. 2014. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage 94th edition). Emerson, Robert, Rachel Fretz and Linda Shaw. 2011. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes (Second Edition). Univ. of Chicago Press. Ragin, Charles. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Univ. of California Press. Liamputtong, Pranee. 2011. Focus Group Methodology Principle and Practice. Sage Publishing. Weiss, Robert. 1994. Learning from Strangers: The Art and Methods of Qualitative Interview Studies. Free Press. Chamblis, D.F. and Schutt, R.K. 2016. Making Sense of the Social World: Methods of Investigation. Los Angeles: Sage. Chapter 11: Unobtrusive Measures. Groves, R., F. Fowler, M. Couper, J Lepkowski, E. Singer and R Tourangeau. 2004. Survey Methodology. Wiley Maines, D.R. 1993. “Narrative’s Moment and Sociology’s Phenomena: Toward a Narrative Sociology.” The Sociological Quarterly 34(1): 17-38. Pampel, F.C. 2000. Logistic Regression: A Primer. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication. Small, Mario. 2011. How to Conduct a Mixed Methods Study: Recent Trends in a Rapidly Growing Literature. Annual Review of Sociology 37:57-86. Tight, M. 2015. Case Studies. Sage Publications. Corbin, Juliet A., and Anselm Strauss. 2015. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lieberson, Stanley. 1985. Making It Count: The Improvement of Social Research and Theory. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1 Ragin, Charles C., and Howard S. Becker. 1992. What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press. Stinchcombe, Arthur L. 1968. Constructing Social Theories. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying “Going Concerns”: Everett C. Hughes on Method by Rick Helmes-Hayes Doi: 10.2383/32714
    Il Mulino - Rivisteweb Rick Helmes-Hayes Studying ”Going Concerns”: Everett Hughes On Method (doi: 10.2383/32714) Sociologica (ISSN 1971-8853) Fascicolo 2, maggio-giugno 2010 Ente di afferenza: () Copyright c by Societ`aeditrice il Mulino, Bologna. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Per altre informazioni si veda https://www.rivisteweb.it Licenza d’uso L’articolo `emesso a disposizione dell’utente in licenza per uso esclusivamente privato e personale, senza scopo di lucro e senza fini direttamente o indirettamente commerciali. Salvo quanto espressamente previsto dalla licenza d’uso Rivisteweb, `efatto divieto di riprodurre, trasmettere, distribuire o altrimenti utilizzare l’articolo, per qualsiasi scopo o fine. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Flashback Studying “Going Concerns”: Everett C. Hughes On Method by Rick Helmes-Hayes doi: 10.2383/32714 What principles shall guide us in the discovery of men’s secrets; what, in the telling of them? [Hughes 1971 [1956], 431] xIntroduction In North America, during the middle decades of the Twentieth century, the work of Everett Hughes (1897-1983) was central to a wide range of disciplinary sub- specialities, including race and ethnic relations, work and occupations, and educa- tion. Beginning in the early 1970s, he became subject to considerable critical atten- tion from US scholars eager to examine his legacy [Baker 1976; Becker et al. 1968; Burns 1980; Coser 1994; Daniels 1972; Faught 1980; Fielding 2005; Heath 1984; Holmstrom 1984; Reinharz 1995; Riesman 1983; Riesman and Becker 1984; Simpson 1972; Strauss 1996; Weiss 1997]. In Europe, by contrast, Hughes had no such pro- file. Only after his death in 1983, in the context of a growing, if belated, interest in the general legacy of the Chicago School [see Rémy and Voyé 1974; Grafmeyer and Joseph [eds.] 1979], did French and, now, Italian scholars begin to pay appreciat- ive attention to his work [Hannerz 1983; Peneff 1984; Winkin 1988; Coulon 1992; Sociétés Contemporaines 27 [juillet] 1997, entire issue; Wax 2000; Chapoulie 2001].
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Serendipity: Opportunities and Challenges for Human-AI Collaboration in Qualitative Analysis
    Supporting Serendipity: Opportunities and Challenges for Human-AI Collaboration in Qualitative Analysis JIALUN AARON JIANG, University of Colorado Boulder, USA KANDREA WADE, University of Colorado Boulder, USA CASEY FIESLER, University of Colorado Boulder, USA JED R. BRUBAKER, University of Colorado Boulder, USA Qualitative inductive methods are widely used in CSCW and HCI research for their ability to generatively discover deep and contextualized insights, but these inherently manual and human-resource-intensive pro- cesses are often infeasible for analyzing large corpora. Researchers have been increasingly interested in ways to apply qualitative methods to “big” data problems, hoping to achieve more generalizable results from larger amounts of data while preserving the depth and richness of qualitative methods. In this paper, we describe a study of qualitative researchers’ work practices and their challenges, with an eye towards whether this is an appropriate domain for human-AI collaboration and what successful collaborations might entail. Our findings characterize participants’ diverse methodological practices and nuanced collaboration dynamics, and identify areas where they might benefit from AI-based tools. While participants highlight the messiness and uncertainty of qualitative inductive analysis, they still want full agency over the process and believe that AI should not interfere. Our study provides a deep investigation of task delegability in human-AI collaboration in the context of qualitative analysis, and offers directions for the design of AI assistance that honor serendipity, human agency, and ambiguity. CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing ! Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms; Collaborative and social computing design and evaluation methods. Additional Key Words and Phrases: Qualitative research; interview; AI; human-AI collaboration ACM Reference Format: Jialun Aaron Jiang, Kandrea Wade, Casey Fiesler, and Jed R.
    [Show full text]
  • Boys in White: Um Clássico Da Pesquisa Qualitativa Completa Cinquenta Anos
    Boys in white: um clássico da pesquisa qualitativa completa cinquenta anos NUNES, Everardo Duarte; BARROS, Nelson Filice de. Boys in white: um clássico da pesquisa qualitativa completa cinquenta anos. História, Ciências, Saúde – Manguinhos. Rio de Janeiro, v.21, n.4, out.-dez. 2014, p.1179-1196. Resumo O artigo analisa o livro Boys in white: student culture in medical school, de Boys in white: um clássico Howard S. Becker, Blanche Geer, Everett C. Hughes e Anselm Strauss, considerado da pesquisa qualitativa um dos modelos de pesquisa qualitativa em sociologia. A análise aborda as completa cinquenta anos trajetórias dos autores, do livro, da pesquisa qualitativa e dos estudantes de medicina, enfatizando sua importância Boys in white: a classic of nas origens da sociologia médica e da sociologia da educação médica. Na qualitative research turns 50 trajetória dos autores são apresentados aspectos biobibliográficos; na da pesquisa qualitativa, o modo como essa metodologia de investigação atravessa a construção do trabalho de campo; e na dos estudantes, sua forma de atravessar os primeiros anos da escola médica e construir sua própria “cultura do estudante”. Palavras-chave: Boys in white; estudante de medicina; pesquisa qualitativa; sociologia médica; sociologia da educação médica. Abstract This article analyzes Boys in white: student culture in medical school by Howard S. Becker, Blanche Geer, Everett C. Hughes and Anselm Strauss, considered a model of qualitative research in sociology. Everardo Duarte Nunes The analysis investigates the trajectories of the authors, the book, qualitative analysis, Professor, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas/ Universidade Estadual de Campinas (Unicamp). and the medical students, emphasizing Rua Tessália Vieira de Camargo, 126 their importance in the origins of medical 13083-887 – Campinas – SP – Brasil sociology and the sociology of medical [email protected] education.
    [Show full text]
  • Format (Sample) Dissertation
    Self-Regulation and Spiritual Coping Processes in School-aged Children Diagnosed with Depression Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Guthery, Ann Marie Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 01/10/2021 18:44:48 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/195945 SELF-REGULATION AND SPIRITUAL COPING PROCESSES IN SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN DIAGNOSED WITH DEPRESSION by Ann Marie Guthery ________________________ Copyright © Ann Marie Guthery 2010 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the COLLEGE OF NURSING In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2 0 1 0 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Ann Marie Guthery entitled ‘SELF-REGULATION AND SPIRITUAL COPING PROCESSES IN SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN DIAGOSED WITH DEPRESSION’ and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy ___________________________________________________________________________ Date: April 13, 2010 Pamela G Reed, PhD, RN, FAAN Professor ___________________________________________________________________________ Date: April 13, 2010 Elaine G Jones, PhD, RN, FAANP Associate Professor ___________________________________________________________________________ Date: April 13, 2010 Terry A Badger, PhD, PMHCNS-BC, FAAN Professor Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate’s submission of the final copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College.
    [Show full text]
  • U·M·I University Microfilms International a Bell & Howelilnformation Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, M148106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600
    Life on hold: A theory of spouse response to the waiting period prior to heart transplantation. Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Williams, Mary. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 04/10/2021 03:39:52 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/185731 INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduce~ from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, ~ubstandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
    [Show full text]
  • Body and Social Interaction—The Case of Dance. Symbolic Interactionist Perspective
    Body and Social Interaction—The Case of Dance. Symbolic Interactionist Perspective Dominika Byczkowska-Owczarek University of Lodz, Poland DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.16.4.10 Keywords: Abstract: The article aims at presenting the symbolic interactionism as a useful and flexible theoret- Symbolic ical perspective in research on the human body. It shows the assumptions of symbolic interactionism Interactionism; Body; in their relation to the human body, as well as explains how basic notions of this theoretical perspec- Interaction; Sociology tive are embodied—the self, social role, identity, acting, interacting. I depict the unobvious presence of in Poland; Grounded the body in the classical works of George H. Mead, Anselm Strauss, Howard Becker, Erving Goffman, Theory Methodology; and in more recent ones, such as Bryan Turner, Ken Plummer, and Loïc Wacquant. I also describe Dance; Identity the Polish contribution to the field, including research on disability, hand transplant, the identity of a disabled person, together with the influence of sport, prostitution as work, yoga, climbing, relation- ships between animals and humans based on gestures and bodily conduct, the socialization of young actors and actresses, non-heteronormative motherhood, and the socialization of children in sport and dance. In a case study based on the research on ballroom dancers, I show how to relate the theoretical requirements of symbolic interactionism with real human “flesh and bones.” I depict three ways of perceiving own bodies by dancers: a material, a tool, a partner; and, two processes their bodies are subjected to: sharpening and polishing a tool. I draw the link between the processual character of the body, of the symbolic interactionist theoretical perspective, and process-focused grounded theory methodology.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracing the History of Grounded Theory Methodology: from Formation to Fragmentation
    The Qualitative Report Volume 19 Number 52 Article 1 12-29-2014 Tracing the History of Grounded Theory Methodology: From Formation to Fragmentation Méabh Kenny University College Cork, [email protected] Robert Fourie University College Cork, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr Part of the Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons, and the Social Statistics Commons Recommended APA Citation Kenny, M., & Fourie, R. (2014). Tracing the History of Grounded Theory Methodology: From Formation to Fragmentation. The Qualitative Report, 19(52), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2014.1416 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Qualitative Report at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Qualitative Report by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Tracing the History of Grounded Theory Methodology: From Formation to Fragmentation Abstract There are very few articles, which track the history of Grounded Theory (GT) methodology from its tentative conception to its present divisions. This journal article addresses the dearth by tracing the history of GT methodology from its conception in the 1960’s, discussing the context of its composition, character, and contribution. Subsequently, the article follows the maturation of GT which is characterised by a series of contentious and, at times, antagonistic academic debates. The crux of these debates centres on disputes over core tenets of GT and have resulted in three dominant and divergent configurations of the GT methodology: Classic, Straussian, and Constructivist GT.
    [Show full text]
  • Body and Social Interaction—The Case of Dance
    Body and Social Interaction—The Case of Dance. Symbolic Interactionist Perspective Dominika Byczkowska-Owczarek University of Lodz, Poland DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.16.4.10 Keywords: Abstract: The article aims at presenting the symbolic interactionism as a useful and flexible theoret- Symbolic ical perspective in research on the human body. It shows the assumptions of symbolic interactionism Interactionism; Body; in their relation to the human body, as well as explains how basic notions of this theoretical perspec- Interaction; Sociology tive are embodied—the self, social role, identity, acting, interacting. I depict the unobvious presence of in Poland; Grounded the body in the classical works of George H. Mead, Anselm Strauss, Howard Becker, Erving Goffman, Theory Methodology; and in more recent ones, such as Bryan Turner, Ken Plummer, and Loïc Wacquant. I also describe Dance; Identity the Polish contribution to the field, including research on disability, hand transplant, the identity of a disabled person, together with the influence of sport, prostitution as work, yoga, climbing, relation- ships between animals and humans based on gestures and bodily conduct, the socialization of young actors and actresses, non-heteronormative motherhood, and the socialization of children in sport and dance. In a case study based on the research on ballroom dancers, I show how to relate the theoretical requirements of symbolic interactionism with real human “flesh and bones.” I depict three ways of perceiving own bodies by dancers: a material, a tool, a partner; and, two processes their bodies are subjected to: sharpening and polishing a tool. I draw the link between the processual character of the body, of the symbolic interactionist theoretical perspective, and process-focused grounded theory methodology.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae - Anselm L
    CURRICULUM VITAE - ANSELM L. STRAUSS 1916-1996 Final Title & Department Emeritus Professor of Sociology Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences University of California, San Francisco Education and Degrees 1939 University of Virginia B.S. Biology 1942 University of Chicago M.A. Sociology 1945 University of Chicago Ph.D. Sociology Positions 1944-46 Department of Sociology, Lawrence College, WA Lecturer 1946-52 Department of Sociology, Indiana University, IN Assistant Professor 1952-58 Department of Sociology, University of Chicago, IL. Assistant Professor 1958-60 Inst. for Psychosomatic and Psychiatric Research & Training Michael Reese Hospital, Chicago. Director of Research 1960-80 Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences Professor, Founder, University of California, San Francisco, CA. and Chair 1980-87 Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, UCSF Professor 1987-decease Department of Social & Behavioral Sciences, UCSF Professor Emeritus Honors and Awards 1977 Director, George Herbert Mead Archive, University of Constance 1980 (Elected) Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science 1980 Charles H. Cooley Award, Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction 1981 Leo G. Reader Award for Distinguished Scholarship in Medical Sociology, Medical Sociology Section, American Sociological Association. 1985 Helen Nahm, Research Lecturer, School of Nursing, UCSF 1985 George H. Mead Award, Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction 1986-7 Thirtieth Campus Faculty Research Lecturer, UCSF 1994 Cooley-Mead Award,
    [Show full text]
  • The Enigma of the Total Institution
    Il Mulino - Rivisteweb Philippe Vienne The Enigma of the Total Institution. Rethinking the Hughes-Goffman Intellectual Relationship (doi: 10.2383/32720) Sociologica (ISSN 1971-8853) Fascicolo 2, maggio-giugno 2010 Ente di afferenza: () Copyright c by Societ`aeditrice il Mulino, Bologna. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Per altre informazioni si veda https://www.rivisteweb.it Licenza d’uso L’articolo `emesso a disposizione dell’utente in licenza per uso esclusivamente privato e personale, senza scopo di lucro e senza fini direttamente o indirettamente commerciali. Salvo quanto espressamente previsto dalla licenza d’uso Rivisteweb, `efatto divieto di riprodurre, trasmettere, distribuire o altrimenti utilizzare l’articolo, per qualsiasi scopo o fine. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Flashback The Enigma of the Total Institution Rethinking the Hughes-Goffman Intellectual Relationship by Philippe Vienne doi: 10.2383/32720 1. Introduction Everett Cherrington Hughes and his student Erving Goffman are two of the major figures in the history of American sociology. The nature of the relationship between them – Hughes the teacher, Goffman the student – is discussed in some de- tail by Jean-Michel Chapoulie [1984], Yves Winkin [1988], in his biography of Goff- man, and by Gary Jaworski [2000]. Accounts of the relationship differ. According to Chapoulie and Winkin, the relationship was a difficult one; Hughes maintained a relatively cold and distant relationship with his pupil, while Goffman all but refused to acknowledge any indebtedness to his teacher until late in his life. For his part, Jaworski has radically questioned this account of their relationship. On the basis of a detailed review of archival materials, specifically an analysis of long-term corres- pondence between them, Jaworski has claimed that the relationship was far from cold and distant.
    [Show full text]
  • A Personal Journey with Grounded Theory Methodology Biographical Note1
    Volume 17, No. 1, Art. 16 January 2016 A Personal Journey with Grounded Theory Methodology Kathy Charmaz in Conversation With Reiner Keller Key words: Abstract: Kathy CHARMAZ is one of the most important thinkers in grounded theory methodology grounded theory today. Her trailblazing work on constructivist grounded theory continues to inspire research across methodology; many disciplines and around the world. In this interview, she reflects on the aura surrounding qualitative qualitative inquiry that existed in California in the late 1960s to early 1970s and the lessons she research; learned from her first forays into empirical research. She comments on the trajectory that grounded interviews; theory research has followed since then and gives an account of her own perspective on symbolic constructivist grounded theory. In doing so, she underlines the importance of the Chicago School interactionism; and symbolic interactionist tradition for grounded theory research work today and shows where the constructivism; latter is positioned in the current field of qualitative fieldwork. health; medicine; sociology; Table of Contents education; evaluation 1. A Sociologist by Accident 2. Entering Grounded Theory Research 3. "Good Days, Bad Days" 4. Questions of Method 4. Towards Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology 5. On Legacies: Grounded Theory Methodology and Symbolic Interactionism 6. Evaluating Qualitative Research? References Authors Citation Biographical Note1 Kathy CHARMAZ is professor of sociology and Director of the Faculty Writing Program at Sonoma State University. In the latter position she leads seminars for faculty to help them complete their research and scholarly writing. She has written, co-authored, or co-edited fourteen books, with two winning awards: "Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis" (CHARMAZ, 2006) and "Good Days, Bad Days: The Self in Chronic Illness and Time" (CHARMAZ, 1991).
    [Show full text]