Brains working towards machine consciousness

Grounded Theory is used to develop theory from data. It is a qualitative method, based on several stages of analysis of primary data. Open coding is first used to generate a set of themes, which are then categorized into higher level concepts using a process called focussed coding. The production of theoretical memos to explore the ideas behind the categories provides a synthesis of new ideas, and these can then be used to support the extraction of a core category. The core category illustrates the relationships between the categories, but this can take the form of a model, typology or even a storyline. The core category could also be described as a thesis.

Grounded Theory is essentially a naturalistic approach, providing the framework to produce theory based on observations. Practitioners have developed the technique in different directions since its conception. The 'purer' form, advocated by Glaser (one of the original authors of the method) dismisses the use of using data fragments for hypothesis testing as it is a positivistic approach, the use of introspection for theory building, as it is relativistic (being based on the experiences of the researcher) and of using a 'conditional matrix' to aid in generalisation as it is also positivist in nature. More on these issues later, and on other methods derived from grounded theory, such as radical constructivism.

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) is similar to Grounded Theory up to a point. The main difference is that IPA can be used to examine a single case. The original author of the method (Jonathan Smith, 1999) outlines the methods application to building an analysis in a step-wise fashion, comparing one case with others in a group. As this is done, additional themes will be discovered which will lead back to further analysis of the original case in an iterative fashion. IPA specifically focuses on the phenomenological experiences of the subject - unlike some other methods (such as Discourse Analysis) which focus on the dialogue. This can be important, as people will often keep elements of their experiences and motivations back from a normal interview process. For example, students being interviewed as part of a university research project may well hold back about concerns or difficulties they have had using a system if the think that the problem is due to them not understanding something. There is a social expectation that they will understand, and they do not wish to cause a negative impact on their reputation by admitting there was a problem.