.png){kind=icon}
返回
Grounded theory
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1080/1750984X.2022.2028305.png)
.png){kind=icon}
原文求助.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
The purposes of this paper were to (a) describe and assess the use of grounded theory methodology (GTM) in sport psychology over the past 11 years and (b) provide some guidance for best practices moving forward. Following a brief summary of the history of GTM, we present the results of a rapid review of seven sport psychology journals from 2009 to 2021. A total of 35 articles that made claims regarding the use of GTM as a methodology were retained. The retained articles were assessed using 11 criteria. Overall, the methodological completeness of GTM studies in sport psychology appears to have improved over the past decade. Twenty-two of the 35 articles met all, or all but one, of the criteria. Thirteen articles did not meet two or more of the criteria. In terms of areas for improvement, the least widely reported procedures were theoretical sampling (reported in 22 of 35 studies), theoretical saturation (22 of 35 studies), and assessment of theory (22 of 35 studies). Furthermore, the sophisticated positioning of theoretical sensitivity was sometimes lacking in the articles. We discuss ways in which researchers can increase the conceptual and theoretical sophistication of methodologically sound GTM studies.
Keyword:
Grounded theory
qualitative research
rapid review
methodology
sport psychology
期刊
IF:
6.7
论文数:
305
被引数:
2.6K
机构
引用论文
Annual cycles in the incidence of B chromosomes in the grasshopper Myrmeleotettix maculatus (Acrididae: Orthoptera).png)
Heredity
OAAI
HeredityIF0
OAAI分享收藏An Energy-Efficient Protocol Using an Objective Function & Random Search with Jumps for WSN一种基于目标函数和跳跃随机搜索的无线传感器网络节能协议OAAI
OAAI分享收藏Using diagrams to support the research process: examples from grounded theoryQUALITATIVE RESEARCH
QUALITATIVE RESEARCHIF2.9
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容