Ethnography, Grounded Theory, and Phenomenology
The field of science involves numerous approaches to sampling, hypothesis setting, and research methods. The establishment of the specific method allows the researchers adequately evaluate the given phenomenon and answer the main questions. Among the research methods of qualitative studies are ethnography, grounded theory, and phenomenology. While these techniques might share certain similarities, they are, by nature, different and lead to varying approaches to the study and evidence. Thus, while being systematic and qualitative methods of research, their difference lies within different approaches to theories and goals.
To start with, the main similarity between the research methods is their qualitative nature. In this sense, the study will focus on and assess non-numerical data to reach a conclusion. For instance, data with the ethnographic method are gathered through observations and interviews for the inquiry area of communities and people operations and interconnectedness and its ethnos domain. A qualitative approach known as grounded theory allows researchers to investigate a specific occurrence or activity and develop new hypotheses that are founded on the gathering and examination of empirical facts (Jamali, 2018). Lastly, a qualitative research strategy called phenomenological research aims to comprehend and characterize a phenomenon’s fundamental elements. Another similarity is the systemic nature of the methods since, as can be seen, they follow a specific plan, such as deciding upon data collection techniques or choosing specific theories or phenomena to observe.
However, the given methods are still, for the most part, different. For instance, in the disciplines of psychology and social sciences, ethnography is a qualitative method for gathering information that is commonly applied (Jamali, 2018). Rather than attempting to control the process in a laboratory, which can be done with grounded theory, qualitative researchers observe the direct environment (Korstjens & Moser, 2017). Since reality is unpredictable, ethnographers frequently find it difficult to summarize their work in a format that the committee can easily understand.
As for the grounded theory, unlike phenomenology, which uses a research tradition of the deductive method, starting with a theory and then attempting to prove or refute it, the former is an inductive technique to study that develops new concepts from the evidence as opposed. Adaptive processes are used for data gathering, data processing, and theory building. Until theoretical saturation, when more data do not, however, offer any fresh insights into the theoretical concept, iterative data gathering and analysis are performed (Jamali, 2018). Lastly, unlike the ethnography method, which involves focusing on both the environment and society, phenomenology concentrates on individuals in order to investigate how individuals interpret situations. Any preconceived notions the researcher may have about the occurrence must be bracketed in phenomenological research design (Korstjens & Moser, 2017). Additionally, unlike grounded theory, phenomenology’s purpose is to evaluate lived experiences rather than focus on theories behind the events.
Hence, despite being systematic and qualitative research methodologies, they differ in how they approach theories and objectives. The qualitative aspect of the research approaches is where they most resemble one another. The systematic aspect of the approaches, which can be seen to follow a predetermined plan, is another resemblance. However, there are differences between the methods, notably phenomenological method emphasizes a group’s personal experiences. In turn, grounded theory and ethnography explain an event’s underlying causes. As a result, while some methods focus on the individual, others focus on the environment and theories that influence this person and community.
References
Jamali, H. R. (2018). Does research using qualitative methods (grounded theory, ethnography, and phenomenology) have more impact?. Library & Information Science Research, 40(3-4), 201-207.
Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2017). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 2: Context, research questions and designs. European Journal of General Practice, 23(1), 274-279.