This article describes the rationale for the choice of constructivist grounded theory methodology in a research project which explored women’s responses to intimate partner violence. In view of the very sensitive subject matter of the study, and the long standing and predominant influence of feminist theory in understanding both the causality and dynamics of such violence, a methodology was sought which reflected feminist approaches to research. The article explores the debates regarding the existence or even the possibility of a ‘feminist methodology’. In concluding that there is no specific feminist methodology, the article outlines the rational for the choice of episodic narrative interviews and constructivist grounded theory as methodologies which uphold the goals and values of feminist research. The application of constructivist grounded theory in the analysis of the data and its suitability in the development of a theoretical analysis of women’s responses to intimate partner violence is presented and discussed.
Back, L. (2007) The Art of Listening. Oxford. Berg .
2.
Blumer, H. ( 1954) ‘What is Wrong with Social Theory?’, American Sociological Review18: 3-10.
3.
Blumer, H. ( 1969) Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
4.
Bonner, K.M. ( 2001) ‘Reflexivity and Interpretive Sociology: The Case of Analysis and the Problem of Nihilism’, Human Studies24: 267-92.
5.
Bowen, G.A. ( 2006) ‘Grounded Theory and Sensitising Concepts’ , International Journal of Qualitative Methods5(3), Article 2, URL (consulted 26 January 2007): http:/www.ualberta.ca/-ijqm/backissues/5_3/pdf/bowen.pdf
6.
Bowen, G.A. ( 2008) ‘Naturalistic Inquiry and the Saturation Concept: A Research Note’Qualitative Research8: 137-52.
7.
Bryman, A. and Burgess, R.G. ( 1994) Analyzing Qualitative Data. New York : Routledge.
8.
Butler, I. ( 2002) ‘A Code of Ethics for Social Work and Social Care Research. Critical Commentary’, British Journal of Social Work32: 239-48.
9.
Charmaz, K. ( 2000) ‘Constructivist and Objectivist Grounded Theory’ , in N.R. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, pp. 509-35. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Charmaz, K. ( 2003) ‘Grounded Theory. Objectivist and Constructivist Methods’, in N.R. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, pp. 249-91. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
Charmaz, K. ( 2005) ‘Grounded Theory in the 21st Century. Applications for Advancing Social Justice Studies’, in N.R. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 507-35. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
Charmaz, K. ( 2006) Constructing Grounded Theory. London : Sage.
13.
Clarke, A.E. ( 2005) Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory after the Postmodern Turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Collins, P.H. ( 1990) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall.
15.
Collins, P.H. ( 1998) Fighting Words: Black Women and the Search for Justice . Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
16.
Denzin, N.R. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) (2006) Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd Edition), pp. 507-35.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
Dobash, R.E. and Dobash, R. ( 1992) Women, Violence and Social Change. London: Routledge.
18.
Dobash, R.E. and Dobash, R.P. (eds) (1998) Rethinking Violence Against Women. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Dockery, G. ( 2000) ‘Participatory Research: Whose Roles, Whose Responsibilities?’ , In C. Truman, D.M. Mertens and B.Humphries (eds) Research and Inequality. London. UCL Press.
20.
Duelli Klein, R. ( 1983) ‘How to Do What We Want to Do?: Thoughts about Feminist Methodology’, in G. Bowles and R. Duelli Klein (eds), Theories of Women’s Studies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
21.
Dutton, M.A. ( 1996) ‘The Battered Woman’s Strategic Response to Violence: The Role of Context’ in J.L. Edleson and Z.C. Eisikovits (eds) Future Interventions with Battered Women and Their Families. London: Sage.
22.
Fine, M. ( 1994) ‘Working the Hyphen: Reinventing Self and Other in Qualitative Research’, in N.R. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 70-82. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
Fine, M., Weis, L., Weseen, S. and Wong, L. ( 2000) ‘For Whom? Qualitative Research, Representations and Social Responsibilities’, in N.R. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 107-31. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24.
Finlay, L. ( 2003) ‘The Reflexive Journey: Mapping Multiple Routes’ , in L. Finlay and B. Gough (eds), Reflexivity: A Practical Guide for Researchers in Health and Social Sciences. Oxford: Blackwell.
25.
Finlay, L. and Gough, B. ( 2003) Reflexivity: A Practical Guide for Researchers in Health and Social Sciences. Oxford: Blackwell .
26.
Flick, U. ( 2006) An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
Harding, S. ( 1986) The Science Question in Feminism. London: Cornell University Press.
33.
Harding, S. ( 1987) ‘Conclusion: Epistemological Questions’, in S. Harding (ed.), Feminism and Methodology: Social Science Issues. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
34.
Harding, S. ( 1993) ‘Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: "What is Strong objectivity"?’, in L. Alcoff and E. Potter (eds), Feminist Epistemologies. New York: Routledge.
35.
Harding, S. ( 1996) ‘Gendered Ways of Knowing and the "Epistemological Crisis" of the West’, in N. Goldberger , J. Tarule, B. Clinchy and M. Belenky (eds), Knowledge, Difference and Power: Essays Inspired by Women’s Ways of Knowing. New York: Basic Books.
36.
Harding, S. ( 1998) Is Science Multicultural? Postcolonialisms, Feminisms, and Epistemologies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
37.
Hartsock, N. ( 1983) ‘The Feminist Standpoint: Developing the Ground for a Specifically Feminist Historical Materialism’, in S. Harding and M.B. Hintikka (eds), Discovering Reality. Amsterdam : D. Reidel.
38.
Hartsock, N. ( 1990) ‘Foucault on Power: A Theory for Women?’, in L. Nicholson (ed.), Feminism/Postmodernism . London: Routledge.
39.
Hartsock, N. ( 1997) ‘Comments on Heckman’s "Truth and Method: Feminist Standpoint Theory Revisited": Truth or Justice’, Signs22: 367-74.
40.
Henwood, K.L. and Pidgeon, N.F. ( 1992) ‘Qualitative Research and Psychological Theorizing’ , British Journal of Psychology83: 97-111.
41.
Hermanns, H. ( 1995) ‘Narrative Interviews’, in U. Flick, E. v. Kardorff , H. Keupp, L. v. Rosenstiel and S. Wolff (eds), Handbuch Qualitative Sozialforschung, pp. 182-5. Munchen: Psychologie Verlags Union.
42.
hooks, b. ( 1984) Feminist Theory: From Margin to Centre. Boston: South End Press.
43.
hooks, b. ( 1990) Yearning: Race, Gender, and Cultural Politics. Boston: South End Press.
44.
Kelly, L. ( 1988) Surviving Sexual Violence. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
45.
Kelly, L., Burton, S. and Regan, L. ( 1994) ‘Researching Women’s Lives or Studying Women’s Oppression? Reflections on What Constitutes Feminist Research’, in M. Maynard and J. Purvis (eds), Researching Women’s Lives from a Feminist Perspective. London: Taylor and Francis.
46.
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. ( 2000) ‘Participatory Action Resarch’, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, (2nd Edition), pp. 567-605. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. ( 2005) ‘Participatory Action Research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere’, in N.R. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd Edition) , pp. 559-603. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48.
Kirkwood, C. ( 1993) Leaving Abusive Partners. London: Sage.
49.
Law, J. ( 2006) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge.
50.
Lemert, C. ( 1992) ‘Subjectivity’s Limit: The Unsolved Riddle of the Standpoint’, Sociological Theory10: 63-72.
51.
Letherby, G. ( 2003) Feminist Research in Theory and Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
52.
Lundgren, E. ( 1995) Feminist Theory and Violent Empiricism. Aldershot: Avebury.
53.
Mason, S. ( 1997) ‘Social Work Research: Is There a Feminist Method?’ , Affilia12(1): 10-32.
54.
Maynard, M. ( 1994) ‘Methods, Practice and Epistemology: The Debate about Feminism and Research’, in M. Maynard and P. Purvis (eds), Researching Women’s Lives from a Feminist Perspective. London: Taylor and Francis.
55.
Maynard, M. ( 1998) ‘Feminists’ Knowledge and the Knowledge of Feminisms: Epistemology, Theory, Methodology and Method’, in T. May and M. Williams (eds), Knowing the Social World. Buckingham : Oxford University Press.
56.
MacKinnon, C. ( 1982) ‘Feminism, Marxism, Method and the State’ , in N.O. Keohane, M.Z. Rosaldo and B.C. Gelpi (eds), Feminist Theory: A Critique of Ideology, pp. 1-30. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
57.
McLennan, G. ( 1995) ‘Feminism, Epistemology and Postmodernism: Reflections on Current Ambivalence’, Sociology29(3): 391-409.
58.
Mead, G.H. ( 1934) Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
Merton, R.K. ( 1945) ‘Sociological Theory’, American Journal of Sociology50(6): 462-73.
60.
Millen, D. ( 1997) ‘Some Methodological and Epistemological Issues Raised by Doing Feminist Research on Non Feminist Women’, Sociological Research Online2(3), URL: www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/2/3/3/.html
61.
Minichello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E. and Alexander, L. ( 1990) In-Depth Interviewing: Researching People. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
62.
Morse, J.M. ( 1994) Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63.
Morse, J.M., Barnett, N.Mayan, M., Olson, K. and Spiers, J. ( 2002) ‘Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods1(2): Article 2, URL: www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/
64.
Neimeyer, R.A. ( 1995) ‘Client Generated Narratives in Psychotherapy’ , in R.A. Neimeyer and M.J. Mahoney (eds), Constructivism and Psychotherapy . Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
65.
Neimeyer, R.A. ( 1998) ‘Social Constructionism in the Counselling Context’ , Counselling Psychology Quarterly11(2): 135-50.
66.
Neimeyer, R.A. ( 2000a) Meaning Reconstruction and the Meaning of Loss. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association .
67.
Neimeyer, R.A. ( 2000b) ‘Searching for the Meaning of Meaning: Grief Therapy and the Process of Reconstruction’, Death Studies24: 541-58.
68.
Olesen, V.L. ( 2000) ‘Feminisms and Qualitative Research at and into the Millennium’, in N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd Edition). London : Sage.
69.
Olesen, V.L. ( 2005) ‘Early Millennial Feminist Qualitative Research: Challenges and Contours’, in N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd Edition). London: Sage.
70.
Parsons, T. ( 1968) Sociological Theory and Modern Society. New York: The Free Press.
71.
Peled, E., Eisikovits, A., Enosh, G. and Winstok, Z. ( 2000) ‘Choice and Empowerment for Women Who Stay: Toward a Constructivist Model’, Social Work45(1): 9-25.
72.
Ramazanoglu, C. ( 1989) ‘Improving on Sociology: The Problems of Taking a Feminist Standpoint’, Sociology23(3): 427-42.
73.
Reinharz, S. ( 1992) Feminist Research in Social Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
74.
Sarantakos, S. ( 2005) Social Research. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
75.
Schechter, S. ( 1982) Women and Male Violence: The Visions and Struggles of the Battered Women’s Movement. Boston: South End Press.
76.
Schutze, F. ( 1976) ‘Zur Hervorlockung und Analyse von Erzahlungen thematisch relevanter Geschichten im Rahmen soziologischer Feldforscung’, in Arbeitsgruppe Bieleflder Soziologen (eds), Kommunikative Sozialforschung, pp. 158-260. Munich: Fink.
77.
Smart, C. (2009) ‘Shifting Horizons : Reflections on Qualitative Methods’, Feminist Theory10: 295-307.
78.
Smith, D. ( 1987) The Everyday World as Problematic. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
79.
Smith, D. ( 1990) The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
80.
Smith, D. ( 1992) ‘Sociology from Women’s Experience; A Reaffirmation’ , Sociology Theory10: 88-98.
81.
Stark, E. ( 2007) Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life . New York: Oxford University Press .
82.
Strauss, A.L. ( 1987) Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
83.
Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. ( 1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
84.
Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. ( 1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
85.
Wade, A. ( 1997) ‘Small Acts of Living: Everyday Resistance to Violence and Other Forms of Oppression’, Journal of Contemporary Family Therapy19(1): 23-40.
86.
Wade, A. ( 2000) ‘Resistance to Interpersonal Violence: Implications for the Practice of Therapy’, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Victoria, BC: University of Victoria.
87.
Wade, A. ( 2007) ‘Despair, Resistance, Hope’, in C. Flaskas, I. McCarthy and J. Sheehan (eds), Hope and Despair in Narrative and Family Therapy: Adversity, Forgiveness and Reconciliation. Hove: Brunner-Routledge.
88.
Watson, D. and Parsons, S. ( 2005) Domestic Abuse of Women and Men in Ireland. Dublin National Crime Council of Ireland.
89.
Whiteley, A. ( 2004) ‘Grounded Research: A Modified Grounded Theory for the Business Setting’, Qualitative Research Journal4(1): 27-46.
90.
Wilcox, P. ( 2006) Surviving Domestic Violence: Gender, Poverty and Agency . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan .
91.
Wood, J.T. ( 2001) ‘The Normalization of Violence in Heterosexual Romantic Relationships: Women’s Narratives of Love and Violence’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships18: 239-61.
