Võrdle meetodeid

	Interpretive Classic Grounded Theory	Interpretive Grounded Theory
Valdkond	Kvalitatiivne	Kvalitatiivne
Perekond	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Tekkeaasta	1967 (classic GT); interpretivist epistemological framing: mid-1990s onward	1967 (foundational); interpretivist articulation ~2000–2006
Looja	Barney G. Glaser and Anselm L. Strauss (classic GT); interpretivist framing elaborated by Merilyn Annells and others	Kathy Charmaz (interpretivist/constructivist strand); foundational grounded theory by Glaser & Strauss
Tüüp	Qualitative theory-building method	Qualitative research methodology
Algallikas	Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine. ISBN: 978-0202302607	Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage. ISBN: 978-0761973539
Rööpnimetused	interpretivist CGT, interpretivist classic GT, interpretive Glaserian grounded theory, interpretive emergent grounded theory	interpretivist grounded theory, constructivist grounded theory, IGT, grounded theory — interpretivist strand
Seotud	6	6
Kokkuvõte	Interpretive classic grounded theory applies Glaser and Strauss's original discovery-oriented grounded theory procedures under an explicitly interpretivist epistemology. It retains classic GT's commitment to theory emergence — avoiding forced conceptual frameworks — while acknowledging that the researcher's interpretive lens shapes what is noticed and how meaning is constructed from data. This stance distinguishes it from purely objectivist readings of Glaser's later solo work and from constructivist grounded theory in its degree of inductive openness.	Interpretive grounded theory is a qualitative methodology that builds substantive theory inductively from data while working from an interpretivist epistemological stance. Developed most fully by Kathy Charmaz, it holds that researcher and participant co-construct meaning, that categories are created rather than discovered, and that the resulting theory is one plausible account among others rather than an objective rendering of social reality.