有关“扎根理论”的参考书目

1.Glaser, Barney G. and Strauss, Anselm L. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago.: Aldine.

Glaser, Barney G.

    2.Anselm L. Strauss, Juliet M. Corbin. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing Grounded theory,1998.

Anselm Strauss, Juliet Corbin.質性硏究入門 : 紮根理論硏究方法.吳芝儀, 廖梅花譯,嘉義市: 濤石文化,2001.Anselm Strauss，Juliet Corbin.质性研究概论；徐宗国,译.台北：巨流图书公司,1998.

Strauss与Corbin (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques教科书的出版引发Glaser的不满。在书籍出版之前，Glaser写了一封措辞极为强烈的书信给Strauss，要求他或者不要出版这本书，或者书中不能使用扎根理论这个名词。但Strauss照原订计划出版，并且获得极大的成功，成为Sage出版社研究方法书籍的畅销书。Glaser只好在1992年针对此书一章一章的批判，写成Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis。双方认为自己的理论才是正统的扎根理论，相互指责对方已经走偏了。

有关二者的分歧和争执，详见：维基百科的Grounded Theory词条：

Divergence

Since their original publication in 1967, Glaser and Strauss have disagreed on how to apply the grounded theory method, resulting in a split between Straussian and Glaserian paradigms. This split occurred most obviously after Strauss published Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists (1987). Thereafter Strauss, together with Juliet Corbin, published Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques in 1990. This was followed by a rebuke by Glaser (1992) who set out, chapter by chapter, to highlight the differences in what he argued was original grounded theory and why, according to Glaser, what Strauss and Corbin had written was not grounded theory in its "intended form" but was rather a form of qualitative data analysis. This divergence in methodology is a subject of much academic debate, which Glaser (1998) calls a "rhetorical wrestle". Glaser continues to write about and teach the original grounded theory method.

According to Kelle (2005), "the controversy between Glaser and Strauss boils down to the question of whether the researcher uses a well-defined 'coding paradigm' and always looks systematically for 'causal conditions,' 'phenomena/context, intervening conditions, action strategies' and 'consequences' in the data, or whether theoretical codes are employed as they emerge in the same way as substantive codes emerge, but drawing on a huge fund of 'coding families.' Both strategies have their pros and cons. Novices who wish to get clear advice on how to structure data material may be satisfied with the use of the coding paradigm. Since the paradigm consists of theoretical terms which carry only limited empirical content the risk is not very high that data are forced by its application. However, it must not be forgotten that it is linked to a certain micro-sociological perspective. Many researchers may concur with that approach especially since qualitative research always had a relation to micro-sociological action theory, but others who want to employ a macro-sociological and system theory perspective may feel that the use of the coding paradigm would lead them astray."

Glaser's approach

Glaser originated the basic process of Grounded theory method described as the constant comparative method where the analyst begins analysis with the first data collected and constantly compares indicators, concepts and categories as the theory emerges.

The first book, The Discovery of Grounded Theory, published in 1967, was "developed in close and equal collaboration" by Glaser and Strauss. Glaser wrote "Theoretical Sensitivity" in 1978 and has since written five more books on the method and edited five readers with a collection of grounded theory articles and dissertations.

The Glaserian method is not a qualitative research method, but claims the dictum "all is data". This means that not only interview or observational data but also surveys or statistical analyses or "whatever comes the researcher's way while studying a substantive area" (Glaser quote) can be used in the comparative process as well as literature data from science or media or even fiction. Thus the method according to Glaser is not limited to the realm of qualitative research, which he calls "QDA" (Qualitative Data Analysis). QDA is devoted to descriptive accuracy while the Glaserian method emphasizes conceptualization abstract of time, place and people. A theory discovered with the grounded theory method should be easy to use outside of the substantive area where it was generated.

Strauss & Corbin's approach

Generally speaking, grounded theory is an approach for looking systematically at (mostly) qualitative data (like transcripts of interviews or protocols of observations) aiming at the generation of theory. Sometimes, grounded theory is seen as a qualitative method, but grounded theory reaches farther: it combines a specific style of research (or a paradigm) with pragmatic theory of action and with some methodological guidelines.

This approach was written down and systematized in the 1960s by Anselm Strauss (himself a student of Herbert Blumer) and Barney Glaser (a student of Paul Lazarsfeld), while working together in studying the sociology of illness at the University of California, San Francisco. For and with their studies, they developed a methodology, which was then made explicit and became the foundation stone for an important branch of qualitative sociology.

Important concepts of grounded theory method are categories, codes and codings. The research principle behind grounded theory method is neither inductive nor deductive, but combines both in a way of abductive reasoning (coming from the works of Charles Sanders Peirce). This leads to a research practice where data sampling, data analysis and theory development are not seen as distinct and disjunct, but as different steps to be repeated until one can describe and explain the phenomenon that is to be researched. This stopping point is reached when new data does not change the emerging theory anymore.

In an interview that was conducted shortly before Strauss' death (1994), he named three basic elements every grounded theory approach should include (Legewie/Schervier-Legewie (2004)). These three elements are:

• Theoretical sensitive coding, that is, generating theoretical strong concepts from the data to explain the phenomenon researched;
• theoretical sampling, that is, deciding whom to interview or what to observe next according to the state of theory generation, and that implies starting data analysis with the first interview, and writing down memos and hypotheses early;
• the need to compare between phenomena and contexts to make the theory strong.

Differences

Grounded theory method according to Glaser emphasizes induction or emergence, and the individual researcher's creativity within a clear frame of stages, while Strauss is more interested in validation criteria and a systematic approach.

Constructivist Grounded Theory

A later version of GT called constructivist GT, which was rooted in pragmatism and relativist epistemology, assumes that neither data nor theories are discovered, but are constructed by the researcher as a result of his or her interactions with the field and its participants. Data are co-constructed by researcher and participants, and colored by the researcher’s perspectives, values, privileges, positions, interactions, and geographical locations. This position takes a middle ground between the realist and postmodernist positions by assuming an “obdurate reality” at the same time as it assumes multiple realities and multiple perspectives on these realities. Within this approach, Thornberg has discussed the problems of delaying literature review until the end of the research process, and has highlighted how to use literature in a constructive and data-sensitive way without forcing it on data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grounded_theory#Strauss_.26_Corbin.27s_approach

3.Barney G. Glaser.Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory,扎根的灵敏性：高阶扎根理论方法论‎，1978.

4.Barney G. Glaser.Emergence Vs Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis‎,浮现对强迫：扎根理论分析基础,1992.在此书中你能体会到Glaser和Strauss两人对扎根理论理解的深刻差异。

5.Barney G. Glaser.Examples of Grounded Theory: A Reader‎，1993

6.Barney G. Glaser. More Grounded Theory Methodology: A Reader‎,1994

7.Barney G. Glaser.Grounded Theory, 1984-1994

8.Ian Dey.Grounding Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Qualitative Inquiry‎,1999.

9.Barney G. Glaser.The Grounded Theory Perspective: Conceptualization Contrasted with Description‎,扎根理论透视：描述性和概念化的比较,2001.

10.Christina Goulding.Grounded theory: a practical guide for management, business and market Researchers.扎根理论：管理、商业、市场研究者的实践指南

11.Richard Ekins.Male femaling: a grounded theory approach to cross-dressing and sex-changing,男性女性化：易装和变形的扎根理论应用,1997.

12.Rita Sara Schreiber, Phyllis Noerager Stern.Using grounded theory in nursing,护理中扎根理论应用2001.

13.Karen Locke.Grounded theory in management research‎,管理研究中的扎根理论,2001.

14.Barney G. Glaser.Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions‎,处理扎根理论：问题和讨论,1998

15.Adele Clarke.Situational analysis: grounded theory after the postmodern turn‎,情景分析：后现代转向后的扎根理论,2005.

16.Antony Bryant, Kathy Charmaz.The SAGE handbook of grounded theory,扎根理论SAGE手册,2007.

17.Joanne Margaret Lye, M H B Perera, Asheq Razaur Rahman, Hector Perera,Grounded Theory: A Theory Discovery Method for Accounting Research‎,扎根理论：会计研究中的理论构建方法.

18.Robert H. Miles.Managing the corporate social environment: a grounded theory,企业社会环境管理：扎根理论,1986.

19.David E. McNabb.Research methods for political science: quantitative and qualitative methods‎,政治科学研究方法：定量研究和质性研究.

20.Hans-Eric Kramer, Eric-Hans Kramer.Organizing doubt: grounded theory, army units and dealing with dynamic complexityHans,组织怀疑：扎根理论，单位和动态复杂,2007.

21.W. Carole Chenitz, Janice M. Swanson.From practice to grounded theory: qualitative research in nursing‎,从实践到扎根理论：护理中的质性研究,1986.

22.Kerry E. Howell.Discovering the limits of European integration: applying grounded theory‎,发现欧洲一体化的限制：扎根理论的应用,2000.

23.Christina Goulding. Grounded Theory: Some Reflections on Paradigm, Procedures and Misconceptions,扎根理论：范例、程序和误解的一些反映,1999.

24.Kathy Charmaz. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis‎,建构扎根理论：质性研究实践指南,边国英（译）,重庆大学出版社 2009年

资料来源：http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5efe47110100e41n.html