Book Review:Artinian, B. M., Giske, T., & Cone, P. H. (2009). Glaserian grounded theory in nursing research: Trusting emergence...

Reviewed by Antoinette M. McCallin, RN, Ph.D. This new research book focuses on Glaserian grounded theory and has been written specifically for nurse researchers. Although the many examples used to illustrate methodological issues are nursing related, the book will be of interest to grounded theory researchers across disciplines. The lead author, Professor Barbara Artinian, has researched using the method and supervised masters and doctoral students for over twenty years. The insights that come from her experience are combined with a strong commitment to endorsing classic grounded theory. The core category of the book could be identified as, “staying true” as per Glaser and Strauss (1967) and Glaser (1978, 1998). The publication is impressive with multiple examples of grounded theory research that are critiqued rigorously yet sensitively. The end result is a resource that will be welcomed by students and supervisors alike. Differences between classic grounded theory, the axial coding model, and qualitative data analysis are addressed albeit succinctly. While purist Glaserian grounded theorists may be disappointed to see discussions on conceptual mapping, modes of grounded theory, and clinical intervention research, the key message is that researchers should strive to remain true to Glaser’s grounded theory. This book is easy to read. Research issues are presented in a matter-of-fact manner. Rich practical examples and thoughtful responses promoting classic grounded theory abound. The writing is sincere yet unpretentious. The inclusion of wide-ranging research examples is a strength, which will be appreciated by grounded theory researchers keen to learn more about methodology. Practical matters that arise in any research project are considered along with the challenges of methodological application. Any deviation from classic methodology, as occurs in the instance of conceptual mapping, is addressed openly. Cone and Artinian acknowledge that they “differ completely from Glaser” (2009, p. 43) in identifying conceptual maps. These maps are seen as a useful tool for research students who are visual learners. While the conceptual map is possibly similar to Glaser’s diagrams, which may have a place in theory development (Glaser, 1978), it is offered as tool to move researchers from description to conceptualisation. There is a provision though: creating a map steeped in description is definitely not recommended. The purpose of mapping is to raise thinking to clarify the relationships between concepts in the emergent theory. The chapter differentiating classic grounded theory from the Strauss and Corbin version is effective. Artinian (2009) suggests that “the emergent method of coding and writing memos about the emergent process is very different from the axial coding method described by Strauss and Corbin (1990) in which every category is fully dimensionalised” (p. 21). The example of axial coding is particularly interesting, as the frustrations of situational description, the complete missing of participant relevance, are discussed. What is helpful is that the example is taken a step further to show readers how a grounded theory researcher can return to the classic method and “lift” the data to generate a theory that is relevant, fits and works. Artinian confirms her commitment to classic grounded theory, emphasising the importance of putting preconceptions aside, and staying true to the data, so that the participant resolution of the main concern is allowed to emerge. Another chapter, “Bending the directives of Glaserian grounded theory in nursing research” might make the purist classic grounded theorist nervous. You are encouraged to read on, however. In this chapter the common issue of staying true to grounded theory when members of dissertation committees do not understand the methodology, is addressed....

Special Issue November 2007

Special Issue November 2007  ←   From the Editor Judith A. Holton. Reading Grounded Theory: The value of exampling Barney G. Glaser The History of Grounded Theory based on Quantitative Methodology Barney G. Glaser Forty Years after Discovery: Grounded theory worldwide Barney G. Glaser in conversation with Massimiliano Tarozzi, After Discovery: Growing success Contributions by Evert Gummesson, Hans O. Thulesius, Alvita Nathaniel, Tom Andrews, Antoinette McCallin, Mark Rosenbaum, Astrid Gynnild, Walter Fernandez, Pernilla Pergert In Honor of Anselm Strauss: Collaboration Barney G....

Volume 9, Issue no. 3, December 2010

                     Volume 9, Issue no. 3, December 2010 ← Editorial Judith A. Holton, Ph.D. Organizational Careers: A forward theory Barney G. Glaser, Ph.D., Hon.Ph.D. Navigating the process of ethical approval: A methodological note Eileen Carey, RNID, BSc. (hons), MSc.  Institutional Review Boards: Perspectives from  the United States Alvita Nathaniel, Ph.D., FNP-BC, FAANP       International Perspectives of Ethical Approval: The New Zealand scene Antoinette M. McCallin, RN, Ph.D.        A Swedish Perspective on Research Ethics Review Hans Thulesius, M.D., G.P.,Ph.D.        Book Review:  Kaplan, S. (2008).Children in Genocide: Extreme    traumatization and affect regulation, London: International Psychoanalysis Library  Carol Roderick, M.Ed., Ph.D. Book Review: Theory buried under heavy description. Kaplan, S. (2008). Children in   Genocide: extreme traumatization and affect regulation, London: International Psychoanalysis Library   Vivian B. Martin Ph.D. Comments on the reviews of Kaplan, S. (2008).   Children in genocide: Extreme traumatization and affect regulation. London: International   Psychoanalytical Association  Suzanne Kaplan,...

Volume 9, Issue no. 2, June 2010

 Volume 9, Issue no. 2, June 2010 ←  Editorial Judith A. Holton, Ph.D. The Future of Grounded TheoryBarney G. Glaser, Ph.D., Hon. Ph.D. Is That a Real Theory or Did You Just Make It  Up? Teaching Classic Grounded Theory Odis E. Simmons, Ph.D Theories in Progress Series:  Perpetual Identity Constructing Alison Clancy, RGN, M.Sc., HDNS (Diabetes), PGrad Dip(Teaching and Learning), Ph.D.Candidate       Book Review: Glaserian grounded theory in nursing research: Trusting emergence (Artinian, B.M., Giske, T., & Cone, P.H.) Antoinette M. McCallin, RN,...

Volume 9, Issue no. 1, March 2010

Volume 9, Issue no. 1, March 2010 ←    Editorial  Judith A. Holton, Ph.D.  Attraction, Autonomy, and Reciprocity in the Scientist – Supervisor Relationship  Barney G. Glaser, Ph.D., Hon. Ph.D. The Coding Process and Its Challenges  Judith A. Holton, Ph.D. Commodifying Self: A Grounded Theory Study Carol Roderick, M.Ed., Ph.D. The Modifiability of Grounded Theory  Alvita K. Nathaniel, Ph.D., RN and Tom Andrews, B.Sc., M.Sc., Ph.D., RN Living on Hold in Palliative Cancer Care  Anna Sandgren, RN, M.Sc.N., Ph.D. Student; Hans Thulesius, MD, Ph.D.; Kerstin Petersson, RNT, Ph.D.;   and, Bengt Fridlund, RNT, Ph.D....