Field-Based Classic Grounded Theory

Ethnography aims primarily to describe and interpret a culture or social world from the insider's perspective; thick description and cultural representation are the end goal. Field-based classic GT uses the same naturalistic data collection methods but the end goal is different: generating a formal set of integrated theoretical propositions — a substantive theory — that explains variation in a core social process. Theory generation, not cultural portrayal, is the criterion of success.

Glaser advocated delaying a systematic literature review so that prior concepts do not contaminate emerging categories — a controversial stance. In practice, researchers typically have some literature knowledge and must balance theoretical sensitivity (being aware of possible concepts) with openness. The key discipline is not to force existing frameworks onto the data; the literature can be engaged after core categories emerge to situate the grounded theory in the scholarly conversation.

Theoretical saturation is reached when additional observation or interviews with theoretically sampled participants no longer modify the properties or dimensions of a category — new incidents are recognizable variations of already-coded properties rather than genuinely new ones. In field settings this judgment is iterative: return to scenes that generated important categories and verify that no new conceptual properties appear. Document this saturation decision explicitly in memos.

Classic GT is fundamentally a theory-generating qualitative approach, but Glaser did not prohibit any data type — he argued all data, including numeric data, can be subjected to the constant comparative method. In practice, field-based classic GT studies occasionally incorporate quantitative field records (census counts, scheduling logs, incident rates) as supplementary data points that inform theoretical sampling, though the core analytic work remains qualitative.

The three variants share field data collection but differ in epistemology and analytic logic. Classic (Glaserian) GT insists on emergence and resists systematic coding procedures imposed externally. Straussian GT (Strauss & Corbin) introduces structured coding procedures (open, axial, selective) and a conditional matrix; critics say this risks forcing. Constructivist GT (Charmaz) foregrounds the researcher's co-construction of data and theory, drawing on interpretivist assumptions that classic GT does not endorse.