Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Reflecting on Reporting Guidelines in Qualitative Inquiry: Advocating for Openness or Methodological Specificity in Constructivist Grounded Theory
by
Probst, Sebastian
, Larkin, Philip
, Bobbink, Paul
2026
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Reflecting on Reporting Guidelines in Qualitative Inquiry: Advocating for Openness or Methodological Specificity in Constructivist Grounded Theory
by
Probst, Sebastian
, Larkin, Philip
, Bobbink, Paul
2026
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Reflecting on Reporting Guidelines in Qualitative Inquiry: Advocating for Openness or Methodological Specificity in Constructivist Grounded Theory
Journal Article
Reflecting on Reporting Guidelines in Qualitative Inquiry: Advocating for Openness or Methodological Specificity in Constructivist Grounded Theory
2026
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
This manuscript provides critical reflections on using reporting guidelines in qualitative research and examines the tensions that arise when universal checklists are applied across diverse methodological traditions. While transparency and rigor are essential, our manuscript supports that widely adopted tools such as COREQ-32 insufficiently capture the epistemological and procedural features of certain methodologies, particularly Constructivist Grounded Theory. Drawing on existing critiques and emerging methodology-specific frameworks, we argue that rigid, sometimes unvalidated criteria could impede methodological congruence and provide limitations to report Constructivist Grounded Theory research. This reflection contributes to methodological scholarship by advocating for reporting guidance that aligns with the philosophical and methodological stance of each qualitative approach. Therefore, we call for nuanced, method-congruent standards that enhance transparency while preserving the richness, reflexivity, and flexibility that underpin excellence in qualitative inquiry.
Publisher
SAGE Publishing
MBRLCatalogueRelatedBooks
Related Items
Related Items
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.