Сравнение методов

	Продольная Страуссианская обоснованная теория	Конструктивистская обоснованная теория
Область	Качественные методы	Качественные методы
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Год появления	1990s–2000s (systematic longitudinal application emerged ~2000–2010)	2000s (Charmaz 2000–2006; classic GT roots 1967)
Автор метода	Anselm Strauss & Juliet Corbin (grounded theory basis); extended by qualitative longitudinal researchers (e.g., Bren Neale, Julia Brannen)	Kathy Charmaz (building on Glaser & Strauss, 1967)
Тип	Qualitative research design and analytic approach	Qualitative research method
Основополагающий источник	Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0803959408	Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage. ISBN: 978-0761973539
Другие названия	longitudinal GT (Straussian), Strauss-Corbin longitudinal grounded theory, processual grounded theory, longitudinal constructivist grounded theory	CGT, constructivist GT, Charmaz grounded theory, interpretive grounded theory
Связанные	5	6
Сводка	Longitudinal Straussian Grounded Theory applies the systematic coding procedures of Strauss and Corbin's grounded theory — open, axial, and selective coding — to data gathered across multiple time points. Rather than producing a static snapshot of a social phenomenon, it tracks how processes, identities, or conditions evolve, generating a substantive theory grounded in change over time. It is particularly powerful for studying social processes that unfold across months or years.	Constructivist Grounded Theory (CGT) is a qualitative methodology developed by Kathy Charmaz that systematically builds mid-range theory from empirical data through iterative coding, memo-writing, and theoretical sampling. Unlike the original objectivist version by Glaser and Strauss, CGT treats both data and theory as co-constructed between researcher and participants, acknowledging the researcher's interpretive perspective as an integral part of the analytic process rather than a source of bias to be eliminated.