DESCRIPCIÓN DEL PROBLEMA

Historically, Glaser and Strauss (1976), Glaser (1976), and Schatzman and Strauss (1973) have argued that grounded theory as a methodological approach could be effectively used by people from a variety of theoretical as well as disciplinary perspectives. In terms of promoting inductive work, grounded theory has been exceptionally influential in the domain of qualitative research almost since its inception (Atkinson, Coffey, & Delamont 2003; Bryman & Burgess, 1994). One key factor in its popularity is the detailed descriptions of the methodology.

With philosophical roots in phenomenology, grounded theory searches to identify the core social psychological and / or social structural process within a given social scene. The ground theory method is essentially independent of the philosophical stance of the researcher and it has been argued that both scientific and phenomenological emphases are consistent with the use of the method (Taylor and Francis, 2001). Grounded theory originates from sociology, specifically from symbolic interactionism, which posits that meaning is negotiated and understood through interactions with others in social processes (Blumer, 1986; Dey, 1999; Jeon, 2004). These social processes have structures, implied or explicit codes of conduct, and procedures that circumscribe how interactions unfold and shape the meaning that comes from them.

The goal of grounded theory is to develop an explanatory theory of basic social processes, studied in the environments in which they take place (Glaser & Strauses, 1967). “Grounded” means based on and connected to the context-dependent

observations and perceptions of the social scene. The researcher constantly and recursively compares research interpretations, in the form of “memos”, against the data, a process termed the “constant comparative method”. Grounded theory examines the “six Cs” of social processes (cause, contexts, contingencies, consequences, covariances, and conditions) to understand the patterns and relationships among these elements (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Within this approach knowledge of social realities is achieved through careful observation of behaviour and speech practices.

Grounded theory offers an empirical approach to the study of social life through qualitative research and distinctive approaches to data analysis. While many grounded theorists have recently produced more constructivist framings, problematic positivist recalcitrancies remain. Strauss (1987) states that due to its complexity, social phenomena require grounded theory.

Atkinson et al. (2003) explains that grounded theory does not describe a kind of theory; rather it is a guide in generating theory - or, even more generically, a way of having ideas on the basis of empirical research. Grounded theory is an empirical approach to the study of social life through qualitative research and analysis. Generally, during the data analysis process, the analyst initially codes the data (open coding) word by word, segment by segment and gives temporary labels (codes) to particular phenomena. The analyst determines whether codes generated through one data source also appear elsewhere, and elaborates their properties. Related codes that have endured are then densified into more enduring and analytically ambitious

“categories”, and these are ultimately integrated into a theoretical analysis of the substantive area. Thus “grounded theory” of a particular phenomenon of concern is composed of the analytic codes and categories generated inductively in the analysis and explicitly integrated to form a theory of the substantive area that is the focus of the research project - an empirically based “substantive theory” (Adele, 2004).

Unique to this approach has been, firstly, its requiring that analysis begin as soon as there are data. Coding begins immediately, and theorising based on that coding does as well, however provisionally (Glaser, 1978). Secondly, “sampling” is driven not necessarily, or not only, by attempts to be “representative” of some social body or population or its heterogeneities but especially and explicitly by theoretical concerns that have emerged in the provisional analysis to date. Such “theoretical sampling” focuses on finding new data sources - persons or things and not theories - that can best explicitly address specific theoretically interesting facets of the emergent analysis.

In order conduct a thorough data analysis, it is still necessary to have a clear understanding of grounded theory. However, this research cannot totally adopt this method; it can simply take specific elements that are deemed appropriate. There are some aspects of grounded theory that help with the direction of the data collection process. The method by which text is coded, defined, categorised and theorised will be followed. This helps with the definition of many new words and definitions. However, the “six Cs” will not be strictly followed throughout the process. This is due to the fact that the interviews will be semi-structured with an emphasis on

having free flowing conversations, which means that the analysis will be conducted with a similar perspective. Within local music scenes, DIY artists come from a wide range of backgrounds, therefore, it is difficult to have pre-conceived ideas about how to interact during the data collection process. This aspect is in conflict with symbolic interactionist views of grounded theory and will not be utilised in this research. Therefore, this research will not totally apply the pure principles of grounded theory, it will only use some of the concepts directly influence of the data analyse process.

Hence, in the following section, data collection techniques will be discussed and identified, thus a data collection sample will be designed. Moreover, themes identified through the coding of initial interviews may also be explored in following- up interviews.

3.3 Review of Techniques