Grounded Theory and Phenomenology Differ in How

¶ … grounded theory and phenomenology differ in how the data is treated (Creswell, Hanson, Plano, and Morales, 2007, p. 248-255). While both collect information from a large number of participants, grounded theory results in the development of a theoretical model based on the data. This model is then tested for its ability to predict a specific outcome. By comparison, researchers using a phenomenological approach try to identify common experiences among the study subjects.

An example of a grounded theory approach would be researchers examining how therapists use cognitive-behavioral therapy when treating victims of trauma. One or more outcome measures would typically be identified, such as patient quality of life improvements. The goal would be identifying common factors that increase the efficacy of treatment, thereby validating the model. By comparison, a phenomenological study design would collect the experiences of therapists and patients in order to identify the essence of a successful treatment approach. Essentially, researchers using grounded theory would be interested in understanding the critical elements of the process of treatment, while researchers using a phenomenological study design would be interested in understanding the experience of treating patients with PTSD.

Question #2:

By combining quantitative with qualitative study designs, researchers may be able to discuss their findings in terms of objective, statistically-significant measures. Qualitative data can in turn put these results into perspective from the vantage point of therapists' and patients' experiences, thereby helping researchers and research consumers better understand the significance and utility of findings.

A recent study examined the efficacy of group music therapy for patients suffering from PTSD (Carr et al., 2012). This treatment approach was of interest because it had shown promise in reducing symptom severity in patients who did not benefit from behavioral-cognitive therapy. The quantitative component of the study involved assessing the severity of PTSD symptoms before and after 10 weeks of treatment. The qualitative component consisted of analyzing videos of the treatment sessions and conducting patient exit interviews.

The results revealed a significant reduction in symptom severity at the end of treatment (p = .0001) (Carr et al., 2012). While these results revealed group music therapy may be a powerful tool for treating some PTDS patients, the qualitative component revealed insights into the subjective experiences of patients. For example, patients were queried about which instruments were more soothing or grating.

Question #3

Saturation represents the point beyond which additional data or study subjects would not alter the outcome of the study (Creswell, Hanson, Plano, and Morales, 2007, p. 251). For example, if two studies asking exactly the same question enrolled 10 study subjects each, there is the possibility that the findings could differ significantly between the two studies due to between-subject variability. However, if a study enrolled 1,000 subjects, the influence of individual differences on the study's findings would be minimized to the extent that an additional 1,000 subjects would make no difference in the outcome.