the literature review in grounded theory: a response to mccallin (2003)

Clicks: 169
ID: 176456
2006
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #27 of 32 articles by views in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The paper by McCallin (2003) is a useful contribution to the debate surrounding the role of the literature in Grounded Theory (GT). For the purpose of this paper and with reference to McCallin (2003) the issue will be discussed in relation to the purpose of a review within GT. It will be argued that the misunderstanding about the function of the literature within a GT study arises partly as a result of the confusion caused by the continual rewriting of the method. Further it will be argued that a preliminary reading of the literature is entirely consistent with the principals of GT. Finally some practical suggestions will be made as to how the issue could be dealt with in a way that is unproblematic for GT.
Reference Key
ph.d.2006groundedthe Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Tom Andrew, RN, B.Sc.(Hons), M.Sc., Ph.D.
Journal Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM
Year 2006
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.