Contextual Sensitivity in Grounded Theory: The Role of Pilot Studies

Grounded Theory is an established methodological approach for context specific inductive theory building. The grounded nature of the methodology refers to these specific contexts from which emergent propositions are drawn. Thus, any grounded theory study requires not only theoretical sensitivity, but also a good insight on how to design the research in the human activity systems to be studied. The lack of this insight may result in inefficient theoretical sampling or even erroneous purposeful sampling. These problems would not necessarily be critical, as it could be argued that through the elliptical process that characterizes grounded theory, remedial loops would always bring the researcher to the core of the theory. However, these elliptical remedial processes can take very long periods of time and result in catastrophic delays in research projects. As a strategy, this paper discusses, contrasts and compares the use of pilot studies in four different grounded theory projects. Each pilot brought different insights about the context, resulting in changes of focus, guidance to improve data collection instruments and informing theoretical sampling. Additionally, as all four projects were undertaken by researchers with little experience of inductive approaches in general and grounded theory in particular, the pilot studies also served the purpose of training in interviewing, relating to interviewees, memoing, constant comparison and coding. This last outcome of the pilot study was actually not planned initially, but revealed itself to be a crucial success factor in the running of the projects. The paper concludes with a theoretical proposition for the concept of contextual sensitivity and for the inclusion of the pilot study in grounded theory research designs

The ethics of secondary data analysis: learning from the experience of sharing qualitative data from young people and their families in an international study of childhood poverty

This working paper focuses on secondary analysis, an aspect of research practice that is sometimes assumed to pose few ethical challenges. It draws in particular on the experience of a collaborative research project involving secondary analysis of qualitative data collected as part of an ongoing international longitudinal study, Young Lives (www.younglives.org.uk), and sets this alongside a wider review of regulatory guidance on research ethics and academic debates. Secondary analysis can take many forms, and bring many benefits. But it is more ethically complex than regulatory frameworks may imply. Whether or not data are publicly archived, ethical considerations have to be addressed, including responsibilities to participants and the original researchers, and the need to achieve a contextual understanding of the data by identifying and countering risks of misinterpretation. The considerations raised here are intended to aid ethical research practice by supporting planning and reflection – for primary researchers who are planning to archive their data, as well as for researchers embarking on a qualitative secondary analysis. Not least, our experience highlights the importance of developing and maintaining trusting relationships between primary and secondary researchers

The political use of the term “moral hazard”: evidence from policymakers of the Eurozone. Bruges Political Research Papers 78/November/2019

Since the global financial crisis of 2007-8, the need for increased risk sharing between the members of the euro area has been acknowledged. However, the evolution towards an “insurance union” has been hampered by the political division between risk sharing and risk reduction. This paper intends to contribute to the explanation of this political deadlock by exploring the main explicit argument underpinning this division, that is to say moral hazard. Unlike most of the academic research on moral hazard, which takes the concept for granted, this paper explores moral hazard from an ideational point of view. The purpose of this research is to question the neutrality of the argument of moral hazard. Using discourse analysis techniques, the empirical study provides information on how and why policymakers of the Eurozone use the term “moral hazard”. This study argues that contrary to appearances, moral hazard is not a de-politicised concept. The author found evidence that the conception of moral hazard is shaped by strategic interests and/or prevailing set of ideas that explain divergent preferences towards risk sharing

Interface-tuned epoxy/clay nanocomposites

Though interface has been known for a critical role in determining the properties of conventional composites, its role in polymer nanocomposites is still fragmented and in its infancy. This study synthesized a series of epoxy/clay nanocomposites with different interface strength by using three types of modifiers: ethanolamine (denoted ETH), Jeffamine� M2070 (M27) and Jeffamine� XTJ502 (XTJ). XTJ created a strong interface between clay layers and matrix because it bridged the layers with matrix by a chemical reaction as proved by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy; M27 produced an interme-diate interface strength due to the molecular entanglement between grafted M27 chains and matrix molecules; the interface made by ETH was weak because neither chemical bridging nor molecular entanglement was involved. The studies of mechanical and thermal properties and morphology at a wide range of magnification show that the strong interface promoted the highest level of exfoliation and dispersion of clay layers, and achieved the most increment in Young’s modulus, fracture toughness and glass transition temperature (Tg) of matrix. With w1.3 wt% clay, the critical strain energy release rate G1c of neat epoxy improved from 179.0 to 384.7 J/m, 115% improvement and Tg enhanced from 93.7 to 99.

A prospective multiple case study of the impact of emerging scientific evidence on established colorectal cancer screening programs: a study protocol.

BackgroundHealth-policy decision making is a complex and dynamic process, for which strong evidentiary support is required. This includes scientifically produced research, as well as information that relates to the context in which the decision takes place. Unlike scientific evidence, this "contextual evidence" is highly variable and often includes information that is not scientifically produced, drawn from sources such as political judgement, program management experience and knowledge, or public values. As the policy decision-making process is variable and difficult to evaluate, it is often unclear how this heterogeneous evidence is identified and incorporated into "evidence-based policy" decisions. Population-based colorectal cancer screening poses an ideal context in which to examine these issues. In Canada, colorectal cancer screening programs have been established in several provinces over the past five years, based on the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or the fecal immunochemical test. However, as these programs develop, new scientific evidence for screening continues to emerge. Recently published randomized controlled trials suggest that the use of flexible sigmoidoscopy for population-based screening may pose a greater reduction in mortality than the FOBT. This raises the important question of how policy makers will address this evidence, given that screening programs are being established or are already in place. This study will examine these issues prospectively and will focus on how policy makers monitor emerging scientific evidence and how both scientific and contextual evidence are identified and applied for decisions about health system improvement.MethodsThis study will employ a prospective multiple case study design, involving participants from Ontario, Alberta, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and Quebec. In each province, data will be collected via document analysis and key informant interviews. Documents will include policy briefs, reports, meeting minutes, media releases, and correspondence. Interviews will be conducted in person with senior administrative leaders, government officials, screening experts, and high-level cancer system stakeholders.DiscussionThe proposed study comprises the third and final phase of an Emerging Team grant to address the challenges of health-policy decision making and colorectal cancer screening decisions in Canada. This study will contribute a unique prospective look at how policy makers address new, emerging scientific evidence in several different policy environments and at different stages of program planning and implementation. Findings will provide important insight into the various approaches that are or should be used to monitor emerging evidence, the relative importance of scientific versus contextual evidence for decision making, and the tools and processes that may be important to support challenging health-policy decisions