Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Qualitative›Visual Elicitation Straussian Grounded Theory
Process / pipelineQualitative design / analysis

Visual Elicitation Straussian Grounded Theory

Also known as: photo elicitation grounded theory, visual data grounded theory, Strauss-Corbin visual grounded theory, image-based Straussian GT

Visual elicitation Straussian grounded theory is a qualitative research design that combines the systematic coding procedures of Strauss and Corbin's grounded theory with visual elicitation — using photographs, participant-produced images, or visual artefacts as interview stimuli to generate richer conceptual data. The approach leverages the power of images to unlock tacit knowledge and produces a substantive theory grounded in both verbal accounts and visual meaning-making.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 2 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Visual elicitation Straussian grounded theory
Grounded TheoryStraussian Grounded Theo…Visual analysisVisual elicitation class…

When to use it

Use visual elicitation Straussian grounded theory when the research aim is to build a substantive explanatory theory about a social process or phenomenon where visual culture, tacit embodied knowledge, or non-verbal experience plays a significant role — for example, workplace safety practices, identity formation in adolescents, or community perceptions of place. It is particularly valuable when participants have difficulty articulating their experiences verbally or when the phenomenon itself is visually constituted. Do NOT use this approach when: the study goal is only description rather than theory-building; participants cannot meaningfully engage with visual stimuli (e.g., certain populations or contexts); the researcher lacks grounded theory training; or time and resources preclude the iterative theoretical sampling that grounded theory requires.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Visual stimuli unlock tacit, embodied, and culturally embedded knowledge that verbal interviewing alone rarely surfaces.
  • The Straussian coding sequence (open, axial, selective) provides a structured, transparent, and reproducible analytic path that strengthens methodological rigour.
  • Participant-produced images give agency and voice to participants, enhancing data quality and ethical engagement.
  • The paradigm model supports nuanced theory-building by mapping conditions, actions, and consequences explicitly.
  • Flexible enough to be applied across disciplines — health, education, organisational studies, urban research.
Limitations
  • Requires both visual research competence and grounded theory expertise — a demanding methodological pairing for novice researchers.
  • Theoretical sampling and constant comparison make the design inherently iterative and time-intensive; timelines are difficult to fix in advance.
  • The resulting theory is substantive and context-bound; transferability to other settings requires careful argument and is often limited.
  • Participant-produced visual data raise ethical and copyright complexities (consent for image use, anonymisation of visual content).

Frequently asked

What makes this design 'Straussian' rather than just 'grounded theory'?

Straussian grounded theory refers specifically to the variant codified by Anselm Strauss and Juliet Corbin, characterised by three-phase coding (open, axial, selective), the paradigm model linking conditions to actions to consequences, and openness to using existing literature as sensitising concepts. It differs from Glaserian (classic) grounded theory, which avoids prior literature, and from Charmaz's constructivist grounded theory, which foregrounds researcher co-construction. Specifying the variant matters because each prescribes different analytic procedures.

Do participants have to produce the images themselves, or can the researcher supply them?

Either approach is valid and serves different purposes. Researcher-supplied images (of settings, processes, or phenomena relevant to the study) can standardise the stimulus across participants and facilitate comparison. Participant-produced images (photo-voice) give participants more agency and often surface more personally meaningful material. The choice should be theoretically motivated and clearly justified in the methods section.

How many participants are typically needed?

Grounded theory uses theoretical saturation — not a fixed number — as the stopping criterion. In practice, 15–30 participants is common in single-site studies, but theoretical sampling may extend or contract this range depending on how quickly saturation is reached. The visual elicitation element does not change the sampling logic but does add time to each interview and to data management.

Can I use software to manage the visual and textual data together?

Yes. ATLAS.ti and NVivo both support mixed media projects, allowing images and transcripts to be coded within the same project. The researcher can attach images directly to coded segments of transcript, facilitating the visual-verbal integration that is central to this design. The software manages data; the theoretical work of constant comparison and category development remains the researcher's responsibility.

When is visual elicitation NOT worth adding to grounded theory?

Skip the visual elicitation component when the phenomenon is not meaningfully visual (e.g., purely cognitive or linguistic processes), when participants cannot or prefer not to engage with images (e.g., low-literacy contexts where images are culturally ambiguous), or when the additional logistical burden — consent for images, secure storage, longer interviews — cannot be managed within the study's ethical and resource constraints.

Sources

  1. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0803959408
  2. Harper, D. (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1), 13–26. DOI: 10.1080/14725860220137345 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Visual Elicitation Straussian Grounded Theory. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/qualitative/visual-elicitation-straussian-grounded-theory

Related methods

Grounded TheoryStraussian Grounded TheoryVisual analysisVisual elicitation classic grounded theory

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Grounded TheoryQualitative Research↔ compare
  • Straussian Grounded TheoryQualitative↔ compare
  • Visual analysisQualitative↔ compare
  • Visual elicitation classic grounded theoryQualitative↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Similar methods

Visual Elicitation Grounded TheoryVisual elicitation classic grounded theoryVisual Elicitation Thematic AnalysisVisual Elicitation PhenomenologyVisual elicitation content analysisVisual elicitation ethnographyVisual elicitation semiotic analysisInterpretive Straussian grounded theory

Related reference concepts

Qualitative Research MethodsMixed-Methods Research in HealthcareVisual AnthropologyDesign Research MethodsSemiotics of the ImageMultimodality

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Visual elicitation Straussian grounded theory (Visual Elicitation Straussian Grounded Theory). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/qualitative/visual-elicitation-straussian-grounded-theory · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Anselm Strauss & Juliet Corbin (Straussian GT); Douglas Harper and Jon Wagner (visual elicitation integration)
Year
1990s–2000s (Strauss & Corbin 1990; visual integration developed through 2000s)
Type
Qualitative research design — visual data grounded theory variant
DataType
Visual materials (photographs, images, drawings, video stills) combined with interview transcripts and field notes
Subfamily
Qualitative design / analysis
Related methods
Grounded TheoryStraussian Grounded TheoryVisual analysisVisual elicitation classic grounded theory
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account