All Is Data

Barney G. Glaser, Ph.D., Hon. Ph.D. ……Although data is plural “is” sounds better All is data” is a well known Glaser dictum. What does it mean? It means that exactly what is going on in the research scene is the data, what ever the source, whether interview, observations, documents. It is not just what is being, how it is being and the conditions of its being told, but all the data surrounding what is being told. It means what is going on has to be figured out exactly what it is for conceptualization, NOT description. Data is always as good as far as it goes, and there is always more to keep correcting the categories with more relevant properties. All is data is a grounded theory statement, not applicable to QDA. Data is discovered for conceptualization to be what it is for a theory. It is discovered by constant comparison which generates a category and properties that vary it. The data is what it is and the researcher collects, codes and analyzes exactly what he has: whether baseline data, properline data, vague data, interpreted data or conceptual data (see “Doing GT”). There is no such thing as bias, or objective or subjective, interpreted or misinterpreted, etc. It is what the researcher is receiving (as a human being, which is inescapable). Data is what the researcher is constantly comparing with tedium, to be sure, as he generates categories and their properties. Remember again, the product will be transcending abstraction, NOT accurate description. While the QDA researcher may be disappointed with what he is collecting, the GT researcher’s job is to analyze its components, its type of data, and take a conceptual perspective on it. Good as far as it goes means the GT researcher is always doing a perspective on a perspective (data) with the goal of generating a theory that resolves continually a main concern, which, as I have said many times, accounts for the main action in a substantive area. For the GT researcher the world is totally empirical. As he collects data his job is to deal with exactly what is happening, not what he would want to happen, not what his own interest would wish the data to be. The data is not “truth” it is not “reality”. It is exactly what is happening. The GT researcher has to be oriented to each course of action having its own meaning. To be sure it does. And once the GT researcher lets this meaning emerge and sees the pattern, he/she will feel “sure” that this is what is going on. This sureness can not be known beforehand. It emerges conceptually through constant comparison. That the data may not be reality or the truth, should not disturb the GT researcher. He should keep in mind that, after all, socially structured, vested fictions run the world, accurate descriptions run a poor second. Thus data is what is occurring, it is socially produced and it is up to the GT researcher to figure it out, BECAUSE the participants are doing it, talking it, using it, think it, are it, respond to it, offer it and so forth. It is going on right in front of the GT researcher! For example, treating talk (an interview) as data comprises not just what was said, but that the talk was given, in a certain way, in a certain context, with a certain endurance, in a culture, with talk story attached etc., etc. The...

The Temporal Integration of Connected Study into a Structured Life...

Helen Scott, PhD Candidate Abstract From the point at which a learner commits to undertaking a course of study, and conceivably some time before, that learner holds an intention to study. This paper offers a theory which explains how that intention to study is strengthened or weakened as a course of study progresses. It suggests that it is much less a matter of learners deciding to persist with or depart from a course of study and much more a matter of continuing upon a course of action embarked upon – of maintaining an intention – by its temporal integration into the structure of their daily lives. The theory of temporal integration explains the process enabling learners to engage in the learning experience and how for some students, the intention to learn is weakened to the extent that they leave the course, most often by default. Introduction The paper commences with an explanation of the main concern of connected learners and, before presenting the core category of temporal integration, will introduce the related categories of connected learning and connected learner and their respective sub-categories of time design and personal commitment structures. It will also detail the properties (and their dimensions) of the category, connected learner which includes personal competencies, value of study and satisfaction with study. A brief overview of the temporal integration process, its three stages of juggling, engaging and evaluating and its feedback loop, ‘the propensity to study’, will be presented next. Different connected learners experience the temporal integration process in different ways and are distinguished by their personal commitment structures, personal competencies, value of study and cost of failure. Using these distinctions, four main types of connected learner can be discerned; juggler, struggler, fade-away and leaver. Since the temporal integration process is experienced differently by each, the temporal integration process is presented in detail first as experienced by jugglers, followed by the differing experiences of strugglers, fade-aways and leavers. The Main Concern The main concern of the adult connected distance learner is to fit study into his or her life on an ongoing basis. Distance learning is taken on in addition to existing commitments and inevitably life intervenes and study gets in the way. The problem is that the learning materials do not go away. The 24/7 availability of the learning environment accessible from increasingly diverse locations and the persistence of learning materials means that lectures are always there to be attended and past discussions are waiting to be ‘overheard’. The difference between the traditional distance learner and the online learner is the mode of delivery i.e. the Post Office or the Internet. The difference between the online learner and the connected learner is pedagogy. Where collaboration is built into the learning design then learners must communicate. This brings with it, its own special strains on a learner’s diary; the more intense the pattern of communication, the greater the strain. The problem of fitting study into a learner’s life is achieved, more or less successfully, through the basic social psychological process of ‘temporal integration’. This is the process by which the structure points of the time design of a connected learning opportunity are combined into the personal commitment structure of the connected learner. Thus two related categories are of import to this theory; the connected learning opportunity and the connected learner, as are their respective sub-categories of time design and personal commitment structure. Connected Learning The studying process occurs under certain conditions which are; the ‘technology’ used,...

Generalizing: The descriptive struggle

Barney G. Glaser, Ph.D.; Hon Ph.D. The literature is not kind to the use of descriptive generalizations. Authors struggle and struggle to find and rationalize a way to use them and then fail in spite of trying a myriad of work-arounds. And then we have Lincoln and Guba’s famous statement: “The only generalization is: there is no generalization” in referring to qualitative research. (op cit, p. 110) They are referring to routine QDA yielding extensive descriptions, but which tacitly include conceptual generalizations without any real thought of knowledge about them. In this chapter I wish to explore this struggle for the purpose of explaining that the various contra arguments to using descriptive generalizations DO NOT apply to the ease of using conceptual generalizations yielded in SGT and especially FGT. I will not argue for the use of descriptive generalization. I agree with Lincoln and Guba with respect to QDA, “the only generalization is: there is no generalization.” It is up to the QDA methodologists, of whom there are many; to continue the struggle and I wish them well. The Descriptive Generalization Struggle Most, if not all, qualitative research method writers talk of the near impossibility to generalize as they struggle to make descriptive generalizations realistic. Most fail. There are several dimensions to this struggle which help explain the struggle and then the failure. Their principal concerns of descriptive generalization are worrisome accuracy of descriptions which soon become stale dated, transferability, internal vs. external validity, unit comparisons to determine similarity and differences (not for concepts), unit comparability for transferability, volume solutions (the more units the better), downing abstract leveling of SGT to a local description, and can a descriptive generalization become a scientific law. The reader may think of more, but considering these dimensions will give the idea that the descriptive generalization struggle is never solved and it does not apply to conceptual generalization. Indeed, focusing on descriptive generalization in the struggle has two negative consequences: 1. conceptual generalizations are missed or passed over and 2. They leave the substantive fields involved open to speculative theory. I will consider these dimensions in linear fashion keeping in mind they are highly interrelated. The writers I refer to are Lincoln and Guba (op cit, chapter 5), Ian Dey (op cit, chapter 11), Janet Ward Schofield, “Increasing the Generalizability of Qualitative Research” in Miles and Huberman, The Qualitative Researchers Companion, (op cit, chapter 8), Margaret Kearny, “New Directions in Grounded Formal Theory” in Using GT in Nursing,) op cit, chapter 12), and Glaser, “Conceptual Generalizing” in the GT Perspective I, chapter 7, and Joy L. Johnson, “Generalizability in Qualitative Research,” Chapter 10. The many other writers such as Creswell, Silverman, Walcott, Morse, Schutt, etc, on qualitative methodology deal with the struggle to generalize but in less than a chapter focused way. See bibliography for this book. Missing conceptual generalization: One major source of the descriptive generalization struggle is the down leveling of SGT by the remodeling impact of QDA on GT. (See GT Perspective II: Description Remodeling of GT). What occurs is that QDA forces a description out of GT and/or GT is taken as description, not as theory. It becomes local to the area of research. Descriptive generalization becomes the problem. The quest is to see if the description applies to another area, if the area is comparable on enough dimensions. The pressure to generalize releases a fearful caution of generalizing descriptions as the research seems particularistic, not general. The fear is...

From Pathological Dependence to Healthy Independence: An emergent grounded theory of facilitatingindependent living...

Liz Jamieson, Ph.D; Pamela J. Taylor, F Med Sc; Barry Gibson, Ph.D. Abstract People with mental disorder are admitted to high security hospitals because of perceived risk of serious harm to others. Outcome studies generally focus on adverse events, especially reoffending, reflecting public and government anxieties. There is no theoretical model to provide a better basis for measurement. There have been no studies examining discharge from the perspectives of those involved in the process. This paper begins to fill this gap by generating a grounded theory of the main concerns of those involved in decisions to discharge from such hospitals. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews with staff of various clinical and non-clinical disciplines, some with a primary duty of care to the patient, while mindful of public safety, and some with a primary duty to the public, while mindful of patients’ rights. The data were analysed using a grounded theory approach. Their main concern was ‘pathological dependence’ and that was resolved through the process of ‘facilitating independent living’. Clinicians and non-clinicians alike managed this by ‘paving the way’ and ‘testing out’. The former begins on hospital admission, intensifies during residency, and lessens after discharge. Testing out overlaps, but happens to a greater extent outside high security. Factors within the patient and/or within the external environment could be enhancers or barriers to movement along a dependence-independence continuum. A barrier appearing after some progress along the continuum and ending independence gained was called a ‘terminator’. Bad outcomes were continuing or resumed dependency, with ‘terminators’, such as death, re-offending or readmission, modelled as explanations rather than outcomes per se. Good outcomes were attainment and maintenance of community living with unconstrained choice of professional and/or social supports. Although this work was done in relation to high security hospital patients, it is likely that the findings will be relevant to decision making about departure from other closed clinical settings. KEYWORDS: pathological dependence, independent living, grounded theory, mentally disordered offenders, high security (special) hospitals Background Most countries have special secure healthcare facilities for people with a major mental disorder thought to pose a serious threat of harm to others, generally after at least one serious criminal conviction. It is difficult, however, to compare outcome studies between different countries because laws, policies, social structures and service availability may each vary widely. Facilities may be entirely within the health services, entirely within prisons, or a mixture of the two. Not all countries provide every level of security, and there may be international differences in definitions of ‘high’, ‘medium’ and ‘low’ security. There is, though, common ground in being held in such a secure institution – in constraints to freedom and autonomy within and outside the unit and long enforced proximity to others with grave health and behavioural problems. In England and Wales, people with a major mental disorder, detainable under mental health legislation and thought to pose a high risk of serious and imminent harm to the public, may be admitted to a high security, or ‘special’ hospital. Median length of stay there is over six years (Butwell, Jamieson, Leese & Taylor, 2000). Perhaps the most common ground to date between studies internationally and over time is in choice of outcome measures. Studies in both the United Kingdom and North America, for example, have focused almost exclusively on re-offending (Jamieson & Taylor, 2004; Steadman & Keveles, 1972; Steadman & Cocozza, 1974; Thornberry & Jacoby, 1979; Pruesse & Quinsey, 1977). There is less common ground between nations,...

Moral Positioning: A formal theory

Thomas Aström, Ph.D. Abstract This article presents the main outlines of a theory of moral positioning, contributing to the analysis of moralizing as a social phenomenon. It is a formal theory in several of its aspects. The discovered patterns help to explain social interaction in conflicts and how ordinary people use these patterns in relation to others. Moral positioning is frequently occurring in social situations were imbalances and conflicts arise among individuals and groups. Moral positioning is here theorized concurrently with a supporting conceptualization of social positioning. The model here presented can be used to explain the positioning process and is possible to use in order to become aware of, and in a better way, manage a conflict. The core variable in moral positioning theory has the form of a triadic pattern, built on the moral positions Good, Evil and Victim (GEV-pattern). The moralizing process is easily understood as socially and dynamically constructed patterns of positions. Those identities are related in three basic and complementary dimensions of meaning; Existence, Interest and Moral dimensions (EIM-pattern), each one with its own conflict pattern. The classic grounded theory method was used and the results were first presented in my dissertation in 2003. KEY WORDS: Conflict, Moral, Positioning, Identity, Interaction, Grounded theory. Introduction Originally the purpose of this project was to find out why there are so many complicated relations in a disabled person’s life. In my first attempts to research the psychosocial aspects of being disabled and belonging to a family with a disabled child, I met a barrier that prevented me from entering that field and getting access to field data. The strong gate-keeping from officials in bureaucracy that protected persons living their lives with or near disabilities also “protected” them from researchers, without even giving them the option to take a standpoint of their own. Being an experienced therapist, I was well aware of the field’s debates and controversies, and I was also aware of some tabooed areas where the dialogue on psychosocial matters was restricted even among professionals. Some of the professionals I interviewed felt uneasy answering this type of questions. The resistance among professionals to open insight was surprisingly strong. Why is that? Wouldn’t a search for knowledge about these problematic issues benefit the clients? Why were the obstructions to openness so strong and feelings of conflict so tense? Why were well informed and experienced professionals afraid of such issues? But on the other hand, parents and persons with disability were often ready and sometimes anxious to give their version. An example referred to by a researcher from an interview with a grown man with disabilities: “One day one of the participants asked me how far I dared to go in my report. He was worried that I in overdone consideration to parents and staff, or because of my personal fear and cowardice, didn’t dare tell about all the hard stuff that had happened in his and the others … life.” An urge for plain speaking. In contrast I met the hesitant attitude in the claims of professionals I interviewed on anonymous cases of psychosocial problems: “Can you assure me you will burn these tapes afterwards?” and another: “I don’t want to be quoted!” or a third: “I feel nasty telling you about this”. Information control seemed to be central in the interaction on such intricate matters. I could later use bureaucrats’ and other professionals’ reactions on the subject as useful data. They indirectly told me what I...