China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Living Aesthetics in a (Post) Pandemic World
Published in Usva Seregina, Astrid Van den Bossche, Art-Based Research in the Context of a Global Pandemic, 2023
Prior to the pandemic, I was working on several research projects centred on consumers' experience of aesthetics in daily life contexts, including aesthetics in the home environment. Much of my prior work on everyday aesthetics took an inductive, grounded theory approach that involved building theory and findings from the data itself, in contrast to using a deductive approach that began with theory and the testing of research hypotheses (Spiggle 1994; Strauss and Corbin 1990). A grounded theory is a theoretical explanation that is derived inductively from the interpretation of the data it represents (Strauss and Corbin 1990). Within this grounded theory approach, I often employed qualitative research methodologies, such as ethnography (study of cultural phenomena), including non-participant and participant observation (Meamber 2011; Venkatesh and Meamber 2008). I collected visual data by taking photographs and video (videography), and conducting depth interviews (e.g., Meamber 2011; Venkatesh and Meamber 2008). I explored reflexivity and researcher introspection as research approaches and methods (e.g., Houston and Meamber 2011; Sussan et al., 2012). Reflexivity involves consciously examining and identifying one's own beliefs, practices, and judgements during the research (Cumming-Potvin 2013). Introspection asks the researcher to track, experience, and reflect on one's own thoughts, mental pictures, feelings, sensations, and behaviours (Gould 1995). I also tried poetry and film as alternate forms of research presentation (e.g., Meamber 2017; Meamber and Tumbat 2003).
Description of a Web-Driven, Problem-Based Learning Environment and Study of the Efficacy of Implementation in Educational Leader Preparation
Published in Cleborne D. Maddux, D. LaMont Johnson, The Web in Higher Education: Assessing the Impact and Fulfilling the Potential, 2021
Christine Mayer, Dale Masser, Herbert Remidez
Qualitative research data from typical end users of IESLP (faculty and students in educational leadership programs) were collected and triangulated by the following means: questionnaires, interviews, informal meetings, demonstrations, online chat sessions, e-mail communications, user tracking scripts, learner artifacts, and message boards. Data were coded and analyzed using the methods for developing grounded theory as espoused by Strauss and Corbin (1998).
Collecting and analyzing SDOH data
Published in Allyson Kelley, Public Health Evaluation and the Social Determinants of Health, 2020
Qualitative data represents anything that is not numeric. Examples of qualitative data include photos, interviews, drawings, journals, focus groups, transcripts from these, videos, and other visual non-numeric data. If you have qualitative data, I encourage you to create a data analysis plan and identify the paradigm from which you will be analyzing data. We reviewed different paradigms early in this text, and this is where paradigms and theories can be useful. For example, an inductive analysis approach allows you to identify concepts, themes, and models based on what is emerging in the data. In contrast, grounded theory utilizes data collected to create a theory about what is happening in a given community or context. Two frequent approaches to analyzing qualitative data are analytic methods and content analysis. Analytic methods include coding, sorting, and identifying themes, relationships, and conclusions about the data. In contrast, content analysis is more flexible and focuses on the content of data with less analysis. Coding is a process of identifying short items of text or phrases in your data that correspond to the evaluation question. Categories may be used to group coded segments. Themes build on categories and relate to the evaluation question (Kelley, 2018).
Safety climate and productivity improvement of construction workplaces through the 6S system: mixed-method analysis of 5S and safety integration
Published in International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 2022
Mostafa Soltaninejad, Mohammad Sadra Fardhosseini, Yong Woo Kim
Standard methods of grounded theory, containing the coding of data and the development of categories, were applied. Data coding aims to systemize a large amount of data [1]. The interviewee’s comments were coded using three phases with respect to Corbin [36]: (a) open coding; (b) axial coding; (c) developing the themes. In open coding, the transcribed interviews were assessed line by line for simple extraction of what the interviewee is saying and, in some cases, indicating or not saying. Open coding involves an in-depth reading of the data to understand the implication and context of the interviewee’s thoughts of 5S and its relationship with safety practices. To test the dependability of the coding process, two researchers coded one interview and compared their coding. All 18 interviews were coded at this level.
Experiences of Personal and Vicarious Victimization for Black Adults with Serious Mental Illnesses: Implications for Treating Socially-engineered Trauma
Published in Smith College Studies in Social Work, 2022
Melissa Edmondson Smith, Rohini Pahwa, Geoffrey Harrison, Wendy E. Shaia, Tanya L. Sharpe
A constructivist grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2006) was utilized in conceptualization and data collection in our original study to understand the lived experiences in self-defined communities for individuals diagnosed with SMIs receiving community-based mental health services. We used the constructivist grounded theory approach to set aside existing theoretical influences to avoid limiting analyses to prior theories, while being cognizant of and acknowledging our own positionalities and biases to guide our analysis (Pahwa, Smith, Kelly et al., 2021) around community experiences and safety in general.. Additionally, we used grounded theory methods, in which, “constant comparisons” were used, by which, information from one individual is compared with other participants to develop a theoretical framework to understand a construct (Padgett, 2016). The current study aims to explore community experiences of Black individuals with SMI related to their exposure to direct and vicarious violence and victimization.
Pluralistic task shifting for a more timely cancer diagnosis. A grounded theory study from a primary care perspective
Published in Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 2021
Hans Thulesius, Ulrika Sandén, Davorina Petek, Robert Hoffman, Tuomas Koskela, Bernardino Oliva-Fanlo, Ana Luísa Neves, Senada Hajdarevic, Lars Harrysson, Berit Skjodeborg Toftegaard, Peter Vedsted, Michael Harris
A classic grounded theory study generates hypotheses for new theory based on thorough systematic analyses of large amounts of data, both empirical and interpreted, quantitative as well as qualitative. The quality of a classic grounded theory may be tried against the principles of ‘fit’, ‘work’, ‘relevance’ and ‘modifiability’ set forth by Glaser and Strauss [14] and Glaser [21–27]. ‘Fit’ has to do with how closely concepts fit the incidents they are representing. Achieving fit requires rigorous adherence to the constant comparison process, where incidents are compared to each other and to emerging concepts. A ‘relevant’ study deals with the real concern of the participants and captures attention. The theory ‘works’ when it explains how the problem, or main concern of participants, is being resolved and when it accounts for most of the variation in participants’ behaviour in the substantive area. A ‘modifiable’ theory is one that is never complete but can always be further developed when new relevant data are compared to existing data. A classic grounded theory is never right or wrong, it just has more or less fit, relevance, workability and modifiability, and readers of this paper may assess its quality according to these principles.