A Constructive/ist Response to Glaser. About Barney G. Glaser: Constructivist Grounded Theory? Published in FQS 3(3)
Recent articles on the Grounded Theory Method (GTM) have started to analyze its conceptual and philosophical foundations. In particular it has been argued that the early characterizations by GLASER and STRAUSS exhibit a scientistic and positivist orientation that is no longer tenable. In her recent...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
FQS
2003-01-01
|
| Series: | Forum: Qualitative Social Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/757 |
| Summary: | Recent articles on the Grounded Theory Method (GTM) have started to analyze its conceptual and philosophical foundations. In particular it has been argued that the early characterizations by GLASER and STRAUSS exhibit a scientistic and positivist orientation that is no longer tenable. In her recent contribution to the GTM literature, CHARMAZ distinguished between objectivist GTM and constructivist GTM. This drew a response from Barney GLASER in an earlier issue of FQS. What follows is a rejoinder to GLASER, offering some clarification of developments in people's understanding of this important and widely-used qualitative approach. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0301155 |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1438-5627 |