This article reports a particular research experience in order to illustrate some general issues connected to the use of an inductive qualitative approach. When a research method is characterized by little structure, many false starts, and much possible influence of the scientist's personality and interests, can it really be called scientific? It can be argued that the inductive approach also follows a classic scientific model, but the answer to this question ultimately depends on the product and on the scientific community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Becker, Howard S. 'Problems of Inference and Proof in Participant Observation', in William J. Filstead (Ed.), Qualitative Methodology: Firsthand Involvement with the Social World, Markham Publishing Co., Chicago1970.
2.
Filstead, William J. (Ed.). Qualitative Methodology: Firsthand Involvement with the Social World, Markham Publishing Co., Chicago1970.
3.
Ghiselin, Brewster.The Creative Process, University of California Press, California1952.
4.
Glaser, Barney G. & Strauss, Anselm L.The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitatiae Research, Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago1967.
5.
Glaser, Barney G. & Strauss, Anselm L. 'Discovery of Substantive Theory: A Basic Strategy Underlying Qualitative Research', in Filstead, op. cit., pp. 288-304.
6.
Kuhn, Thomas S.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago1962.
7.
McCall, George J. & Simmons, J. L. (Eds.). Issues in Participant Observation , Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Massachusetts1969.
8.
Nou1973:56. 'Rammeplan for forsoksvirksomhet i den primære helse- og sosialsektor.' (Plan for experimentation in the primary health and social sector.)Universitetsforlaget, Oslo1973.
