This article is the introduction to a collection of readings called The Chicago School: Deductive Qualitative Analysis and Grounded Theory. The book brings together in one place the articles I have written about these two approaches to research. They originated in the Chicago School of Sociology, which provided the foundation for most types of qualitative research in use today.
Graduate students, new researchers, and experienced researchers in a variety of applied fields will find this volume helpful for the design and analysis of qualitative research. The book is available on Amazon. Buy the paperback and you get the Kindle edition for free.
Original Title
Introduction to the Chicago School: Deductive Qualitative Analysis and Grounded Theory
This article is the introduction to a collection of readings called The Chicago School: Deductive Qualitative Analysis and Grounded Theory. The book brings together in one place the articles I have written about these two approaches to research. They originated in the Chicago School of Sociology, which provided the foundation for most types of qualitative research in use today.
Graduate students, new researchers, and experienced researchers in a variety of applied fields will find this volume helpful for the design and analysis of qualitative research. The book is available on Amazon. Buy the paperback and you get the Kindle edition for free.
This article is the introduction to a collection of readings called The Chicago School: Deductive Qualitative Analysis and Grounded Theory. The book brings together in one place the articles I have written about these two approaches to research. They originated in the Chicago School of Sociology, which provided the foundation for most types of qualitative research in use today.
Graduate students, new researchers, and experienced researchers in a variety of applied fields will find this volume helpful for the design and analysis of qualitative research. The book is available on Amazon. Buy the paperback and you get the Kindle edition for free.
!"#$# &$# '&() uiffeient ways to geneiate theoiy. I have spent much of my acauemic caieei attempting to unueistanu anu shaie with otheis how to use qualitative methous to geneiate anu test theoiies anu to uo theoiy-guiueu ieseaich. The woik of Ruben Bill, Wesley Buii, anu otheis (Buii, Bill, Nye, & Reiss (1979a & b) in theoiy-builuing inspiieu me when I was a giauuate stuuent in human uevelopment at Syiacuse 0niveisity. These scholais heaueu effoits to builu theoiy thiough the couification of existing ieseaich anu theoiy. As a social woikei, I knew thiough expeiience the impoitance of theoiy in unueistanuing complex human situations. I also hau a natuial inclination to want to inteiact with othei people anu to unueistanu them in theii own teims. I was intiigueu to see how ieseaich anu theoiy woikeu in ieal-woilu situations. In auuition, I wanteu to contiibute new unueistanuings of how people view anu ueal with theii life ciicumstances. In giauuate school, I also leaineu about the methous anu methouologies tiauitions at Chicago School of Sociology anu was uelighteu to leain that we can uo ieseaich by talking to people, thiough paiticipant obseivation, anu thiough uocument analysis. Ny uisseitation ieseaich moie than Su yeais ago was baseu on piinciples associateu with the Chicago School, such as life histoiies, immeision, unueistanuing peisons' accounts of theii expeiiences in context, immeision of ieseaicheis in ieseaich settings, anu ieseaich as action-oiienteu. I have been a scholai anu ieseaichei in this tiauition evei since. As Beckei pointeu out, howevei, the Chicago School was "open to vaiious ways of uoing sociology" (p. 1u). The iueas that I have woikeu with ovei the yeais aie pait of the tiauition but uo not iepiesent the entiie tiauition. I elaboiate on these iueas in the essays in this collection, especially in chaptei 19 about enuuiing themes. Ny inteiests aie only one stieam of seveial ieseaich tiauitions. 0iban ethnogiaphies, suivey ieseaich, anu iace ielations aie also pait of Chicago School tiauitions (Fine 199S), but I have not stuuieu them in any uetail. The tiauitions of the Chicago School have enuuieu. The iueas aie not fixeu, but aie flexible, open-enueu, anu subject to ievision, as many eaily ieseaicheis have stateu, incluuing Ciessey (19Su, 19SS), Linuesmith (1947), Angell (19S6), anu Znaniecki (19S4). Ny puipose is putting this collection of essays togethei is to shaie the many geneiative iueas associateu with the Chicago School of Sociology, to show theii evolution ovei time, anu to illustiate theii applicability to contempoiaiy social issues. As a social woikei anu a family scholai, I wiote these essays foi publications in family jouinals anu in social woik jouinals. The fielus aie ielateu anu have shaieu auuiences with othei uisciplines, too, such as psychology, sociology, anu nuising. This collection will be of inteiest to stuuents, new ieseaicheis, anu expeiienceu ieseaicheis in these applieu uisciplines.
&(&*)!+, +(-.,!+/( is the oiiginal methouology of the Chicago School of Sociology when it flouiisheu in the fiist quaitei of the twentieth centuiy. Biiefly, AI involves the use of theoiy, often loosely uefineu, in the conuuct of ieseaich. Beckei (1962), foi example, useu a foim of AI to uevelop a theoiy of maiijuana use. Nany of the ieseaich piojects of both faculty anu stuuents uuiing that time anu latei stateu that the methouological appioach was analytic inuuction (AI), when they nameu theii appioach at all. By the miu-twentieth centuiy, AI hau fallen into uisiepute, paitly because of misunueistanuings ielateu to causation anu univeisality of finuings but also because of unfounueu claims that some ieseaicheis maue about the ieach of the appioach. Betails of the contioveisies aie in some of the ieauings in this volume, such as chapteis 11 anu 1S. uiounueu theoiy methouology aiiiveu on the scene Su oi moie yeais latei anu oveishauoweu AI. uiounueu theoiy methouology (uTN) was cautious about the use of piioi theoiy, waining about the imposition of theoiy on finuing anu auvocating that ieseaicheis allow theoiy to "emeige" fiom the analysis. uTN also maue no claims about causation anu univeisality. It caiiieu on some of the Chicago School tiauitions, such the impoitance of fieluwoik, unueistanuing meanings ieseaich paiticipants attiibuteu to theii situations, the impoitance of unueistanuings peisons in contexts, the uevelopment of theoiy fiom uata, anu the impoitance of applieu ieseaich to effoits foi social change (chapteis 11 anu 2u anu uilgun, 2u1S, in piess a & b). uiounueu theoiy methouologists nevei saiu not to begin ieseaich with theoiy but that became how many ieseaicheis unueistoou its pioceuuies. The uominance of uTN anu especially the iuea that ieseaicheis must not begin with theoiy leu to an unueiuevelopment of qualitative theoiy testing anu theoiy-guiueu ieseaich. Fuitheimoie, uT methouologists have not auuiesseu the question of what to uo with giounueu theoiies when we want to test them on new samples. Clues on the use of piioi theoiy aie scatteieu thioughout the wiitings of ieseaicheis anu methouologists who aie pait of the Chicago School of Sociology. To my knowleuge, this collection of ieauings is the fiist attempt to biing these scatteieu clues togethei anu to uevelop them fuithei.
+ ,/+(#- !"# !#$' .+./)(#7+ =/&*#(&(#7+ &,&*<$#$ aftei yeais of stuuying analytic inuuction anu noticing how othei ieseaicheis use theoiy in theii ieseaich. As is shown in seveial ieauings in this volume, I use this teim because analytic inuuction is not inuuction at all, but a moving back anu foith between concepts anu theii inuicatoisoi between theoiy anu uata. Bewey (191u) calleu this "complete thinking" which involves both inuuction anu ueuuction. In ueuuctive woik, ieseaicheis begin with theoiy. "Complete thinking," also iequiies ieseaicheis to put asiue theii theoiy to iuentify aspects of the phenomena of inteiest that they uiu not anticipate. The lattei is inuuction. They even puiposely seaich foi uata that piomise to unueimine anu thus flesh out theii emeiging finuings. This is calleu negative case analysis, uiscusseu in uetail in seveial chapteis in this volume, incluuing chapteis 6, 7, 1u, 11, 1S, anu 19. Theie is a movement back anu foith between ueuuction anu inuuction. I also chose the teim .+./)(#7+ =/&*#(&(#7+ &,&*<$#$ because of the spoileu iuentity of analytic inuuction. Anselm Stiauss, one of the oiiginatois of uTN, wiote the fiist essay in this volume. Be saiu uTN is a "way of thinking," which shows the connection of uTN to Bewey anu the piagmatist philosophy that Bewey helpeu uevelop (uilgun, 2uuS). I want BQA to have moie piominence foi seveial ieasons. Fiist of all, many qualitative ieseaicheis begin theii ieseaich with theoiy but uon't have a name foi what they uo. They ciaft theii ieseaich this way because it makes sense to them; they simply aie theoietically oiienteu. I, foi example, useu life couise theoiy as the conceptual fiamewoik foi my uisseitation ieseaich without self-consciousness. Theoiy guiueu me in both uesign anu analysis. It seemeu natuial anu noimal. As I show in seveial essays in this volume, most if not all ieseaicheis touay have tiaining in logico-ueuuctive methous, which means they leain to begin ieseaich with liteiatuie ieviews anu to test hypotheses anu to use concepts. The pioceuuies of BQA guiue ieseaicheis in the use of theoiy fiom the beginning of a qualitative ieseaich pioject. In auuition, uisseitation committees anu funueis aie unlikely to give the okay to piojects anu to funu them if they uon't know what the ieseaicheis intenu to uo anu how they aie going to uo it. Conceptual fiamewoiks, composeu of liteiatuie ieviews anu ieflexivity statements, aie the souices of hypotheses anu initial guiuing concepts, as well as the founuation of uesign anu analysis. The uesign anu the concepts useu in the analysis typically evolve ovei the couise of the ieseaicheis, but gatekeepeis such as funueis anu uisseitation committees unueistanuably want as much infoimation as possible about the plans foi the pioject. Finally, policy, BQA can contiibute to theoiies anu finuings that piogiams, policies anu piactitioneis can use to guiue them in theii actions. Finuings iepiesent the peispectives of those foi whom policies, piogiams, anu inteiventions aie ciafteu. Effectiveness uepenus on whethei they meet people wheie they aie. In auuition, finuings often aie composeu of stoiies that may help policy makeis, piogiam planneis, anu uiiect piactitioneis unueistanu the peisons they aie positioneu to seive. Stoiies may bieak thiough the assumptions anu biases that aie built into many policies, piogiams, anu inteiventions. In my own fielu of social woik, I have seen piactitioneis anu policy makeis act on the basis of peisonal piefeiences anu beliefs without challenging themselves to look foi auuitional points of view anu multiple souices of eviuence. In auuition to stoiies, BQA piouuces theoiy that aie piinciples that can be useu as guiuelines foi actions in a vaiiety of situations. The guiuelines aie iooteu in the stoiies of ieal people anu so will have ieauy applicability to human situations.
&() ,/**#,!+/( /0 $#*&!#- #11&)1 have iepetitions acioss them. This is so in the piesent volume. Since some of the iueas go against contempoiaiy tienus, iepetition may aiue in assimilating the iueas anu then in changing minus anu beliefs about the conuuct of qualitative ieseaich. Qualitative theoiy testing, foi example, may be new to some ieseaicheis. This chaptei in the appenuix is an example of qualitative hypothesis testing. Theie aie fai too few of them, but piospect aie biight. Contempoiaiy ieseaicheis aie pushing back against cuiient thought anu piactice of qualitative appioaches. 0ne iesult will be incieaseu numbeis of piojects anu papeis baseu upon BQA. Except foi the aiticle in the appenuix, I aiiangeu the essays in this volume in the oiuei in which I wiote them. I uiu this to invite ieaueis into the intellectual jouiney I took in oiuei to unueistanu how I came to see the ioles BQA coulu have in social anu human sciences ieseaich. The chionological oiuei of the iueas shows the evolution of my unueistanuings ovei time anu thiough expeiience. I wiote all of the essays in the volume expect that fiist wheie Anselm Stiauss is the authoi.
}ane F. uilgun Ninneapolis, Ninnesota, 0SA 1S Nay 2u14
$232425627
Angell, Robeit A. !"+ 0&?#*< +,)-/,(+'$ ("+ .+5'+$$#-,2 New Yoik: Sciibneis. Beckei, Bowaiu (l9SS). Becoming a maiihuana usei. ;?+'#)&, G-/',&* -0 B-)#-*-1<@ HI@ 2SS-242. Beckei, Bowaiu (1999). The Chicago School, so-calleu. :/&*#(&(#7+ B-)#-*-1<@ JJKLM@ S-12. Buii, Wesley, Reuben Bill, F. Ivan Nye, & Iia L. Reiss (Eus.) (1979a). A-,(+?5-'&'< ("+-'#+$ &3-/( ("+ 0&?#*<N O-*2 LN P+$+&')"Q3&$+. ("+-'#+$. New Yoik: Fiee Piess. Buii, Wesley, Reuben Bill, F. Ivan Nye, & Iia L. Reiss (Eus.) (1979b). A-,(+?5-'&'< ("+-'#+$ &3-/( ("+ 0&?#*<N O-*2 JN >+,+'&* ("+-'#+$R("+-'+(#)&* -'#+,(&(#-,$. New Yoik: Fiee Piess. Ciessey, Bonalu R. (l9Su). Ciiminal violation of financial tiust, ;?+'#)&, B-)#-*-1#)&* P+7#+8@ LH@ 7S8-74S. Ciessey, Bonalu (l9SS). S("+' 5+-5*+T$ ?-,+<2 ulencoe, IL: Fiee Piess. Bewey, }. (191u). U-8 8+ ("#,4. Amheist, NY: Piometheus. Fine, uaiy Alan (Eu.) (19SS). ; $+)-,. A"#)&1- B)"--*V !"+ .+7+*-5?+,( -0 & 5-$(8&' ;?+'#)&, $-)#-*-1<2 Chicago: 0niveisity of Chicago Piess. uilgun, }ane F. (2uuS). Qualitative ieseaich anu family psychology. G-/',&* -0 W&?#*< X$<)"-*-1<@LIKLM@ 4u-Su. uilgun, }ane F. (2u12). Enuuiing themes in qualitative family ieseaich. G-/',&* -0 W&?#*< !"+-'< &,. P+7#+8@ Y, 8u-9S. uilgun, }ane F. (in piess a). Social woik-specific ieseaich anu theoiy builuing. In William Nichols (Eu.), Z,)<)*-5+.#& -0 B-)#&* &,. E+"&7#-'&* B)#+,)+$ (2 nu eu). New Yoik: Elselviei. uilgun, }ane F. (in piess b). Wiiting up qualitative ieseaich. In Patiicia Leavy (Eu.). !"+ SC0-'. "&,.3--4 -0 =/&*#(&(#7+ '+$+&')" ?+("-.$2 New Yoik: 0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess. Linuesmith, Alfieu R. (l947). ;..#)(#-,$ &,. -5#&(+$2 Chicago: Aluine. Znaniecki, Floiian (l9S4). !"+ ?+("-. -0 $-)#-*-1<2 New Yoik: Faiiai & Rinehait.