Grounded Theory Sample Clauses

Grounded Theory. The Internet can provide a platform for female actors to construct a less restricted female identity than would otherwise be possible within the Salafi-jihadist movement.

Grounded Theory. In ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (Eds.), Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory (pp. 191-213). London: Sage. ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2006) Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam. London: I.B. Tauris & Co. ▇▇▇▇, ▇.▇. (2005). Hospitality in Islam. Hiba Magazine, 2(3).

Grounded Theory. To do this, I will draw from a methodology inspired by Grounded Theory (GTM), which seeks to approach data with an open mind rather than testing the hypotheses of previous scholars.) GTM is an inductive method of inquiry, dating back to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇’ The Discovery of

Grounded Theory. New Brunswick: AldineTransaction. ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2011). Behind Bars, the definitive guide to music notation. London: Faber Music. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2002). The lute and the polyphonist. Studi Musicali(31), 89-108. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2010). ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, self-instruction, and the amateur instrumentalist. In R. E. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, & ▇. ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ (Eds.), Music eduction in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (pp. 126-137). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Grounded Theory a practical guide. London: Sage Publications Inc. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (1997). Instrumentation and Orchestration (2 ed.). New York: ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Books. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ([2007?]). Quintet for guitar and string quartet no. 4 in D major, G448 "Fandango". Elmsford: Music Minus One. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (1989). Introduction, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and fugue. Ancona: Bèrben. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2006). The debate on research in the arts. Bergen: Bergen National Acedemy of the Arts. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2010). The production of knowledge in artistic research. In ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, & ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (Eds.),

Grounded Theory. In the final stages of analysis, I examined interview, survey, and observational data, both qualitative and quantitative, to arrive at a theory of authenticity that was based on my empirical research and informed by the literature and my conceptual and theoretical frameworks. Based on this wide range of data, I developed a theory of authenticity as integrated relevance, which I will discuss in greater detail in the final chapter.

Grounded Theory. When I began this process, I did not have a clear direction as to how sustainability fit within the community building context of GLAM crowdsourcing. Therefore, I was going to need to let the data lead me in finding the specific questions to answer. I required an approach therefore that did three things specifically. Firsty, it was essential to be able to start with broad concepts and reach more narrow ones as research progressed. This is because I honestly did not know what I was looking for at first. I knew I had questions about education and relationship management and I needed the questions to emerge from the process in order to get to the specific elements of “sustainability” that I think are relevant. Second, the process would need to be flexible and adaptable as concepts became either more or less relevant. This is because at the start there were a lot of questions, such as education’s role in the process, which pretty quickly became clear that those ideas were not at all what I thought they were. My background as an educator caused me to frame my questions at first in this top-down perspective but that was not at all what was happening. For examples, volunteers who were teaching each other or community managers who felt that volunteers taught them highlighted the difficulty of such a perspective. I needed to be able to adjust to that sudden shift in focus from one framework to the other. Lastly, I need an approach that worked with surveys, interviews, and case studies because I had little in terms of a frame of reference for an approach so I would need to gather a broad spectrum of qualitative data to get an answer. In many ways, I was already very comfortable with the Grounded theory approach as a historian in my previous training. When interrogating an archive I would start with a broad set of questions and would write down the questions that occurred to me as I was reading. This would also lead to finding points of connection to other sources within the sources I was reading. Ground theory was just my adaptation of the process I was familiar with to the interview/qualitative data collection process. Additionally, I wanted to take an approach that was in a sense crowdsourced itself and Grounded Theory matched that ambition. The very idea of the project was to understand the impact as well as the sustainability of getting together groups of people and having them work collaboratively on a project. I also wanted my methodology to reflect this and G...

Grounded Theory. Data analysis was conducted following the rigorous procedures of grounded theory (▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1967). Grounded theory is a systematic process to examine data, which iteratively compares codes and themes in interviews throughout analysis with the purpose of generating an inductive theory of phenomena, ‘grounded’ in data (▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1967). Grounded theory was chosen for this paper to rigorously examine men’s perspectives and attitudes of IPV and recourse. To begin analysis, de-identified hard copies of 10 IDI transcripts and two FGD transcripts were read and memoed to initially capture broad themes and describe preliminary thoughts of behaviors seen within each interview. Memos then informed the creation of an initial codebook. The codebook included both deductive (derived from literature) and inductive (derived from the data) codes, and was systematically modified throughout analysis to better reflect phenomena within the interviews. The transcripts were then uploaded to MaxQDA11 software and subsequently coded with codes developed earlier. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ was conducted independently; however, segments of de- identified transcripts were reviewed by other researchers to detect bias and reinforce reflexivity. Re-coding occurred when adjustments to the original codebook were made. The coding process ended once saturation was reached (i.e. no new information was emerging). Codes were compared across FGDs and IDIs to note consistent themes. Themes seen across all transcripts were further analyzed to find associated codes and discover depth and nuance within interviews. Primary themes and codes were used to generate a conceptual framework that reflects factors that contribute to men’s conceptualization of IPV and attitudes toward women seeking recourse (see Figure 1). Among the Vietnamese men within this study, there was clear variation in views on what constituted violence. Subsequently, certain types of IPV that occurred within specific contexts were minimized, unrecognized as IPV, contextually justified, or completely justified. As such, contextually ambiguous IPV was not heavily supported as an incident that warranted formal recourse. Men’s attitudes regarding recourse shifted depending on the context presented. The following are themes that emerged through grounded theory analysis: 1) inconsistent definitions of IPV, 2) minimized and unrecognized perpetration, 3) contextually justified IPV, 4) contextually dependent attitudes toward recourse seeking. Them...

Grounded Theory. Grounded theory is a creative process that is appropriate to use when there is a lack of knowledge or theory of a topic. There is are no solutions provided by existing theory or availability for modifying existing theory, it identifies a series of events and how these change over time (Bluff, 2005, p. 147). As stated in ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (2007, p. 62-63) the intent of grounded theory study is to move beyond description to generate discovery of a certain theory. The overall outcome of grounded theory should provide a theory or conceptual framework of processes, actions or interactions that are grounded in the research participant’s view.