扎根理论编码的“理论鸿沟”及“类故理”跨越

Applying Chinese Traditional Rhetoric Theory to Grounded Theory Procedures:The “Typology-Cause-Reason” Approach

以基本社会过程为追求的扎根理论在揭示社会机制方面有独到作用。然而,在达成"理论"的思路、方法上,不同版本的扎根理论理解不同,且理论编码过程实际存在着不同程度的"理论鸿沟"。人类以"意义"为存在本质提示我们,不同文明的"意义"认知或思维方式有着扎根理论方法论的功能。中国传统的"故理类"思维方式可以转换为扎根理论的"类故理"编码——"类"是基于事物属性的类属抽象心智过程和概念表达;"故"是"类"的因果、条件或过程的关系化;"理"是"类"与"故"构成的事物作用机制的概念形式化。"类故理"是递进的理论抽象、超越过程,它能有效地填补扎根理论的"理论鸿沟"。

As a social science method, Grounded Theory explores the ＂basic social process＂（BPS） through a series of methodological procedures such as theoretical sampling,theoretical coding and theoretical saturation. Due to its capacity of revealing complex social mechanisms, grounded theory has been widely applied in various fields of research. However, exactly what analytical processes enable the researcher to extract theory out of his data is still debated. While each of the three main approaches-- Glaser＇ s laissez-faire approach, Strauss＇ detailed procedural minutiae approach, and Charmaz＇ s constructivist approach-makes its unique contribution to the debate, there is no consensus on how to close the gap between data and theory in grounded theory. This gap exists for three reasons. First, theories can hardly emerge through pure inductive analysis of data. The hypotheses,theoretical frameworks,and experiences that the researcher brings into the coding processes, though often not explicated, play critical roles in shaping up the final analytical outcome. Second, the analyst＇s philosophical and epistemological stance significantly influences or even determines the theory extracted from data. Third, the researcher＇s academic training and other qualities affect his ability to ＂grab＂ theory from unorganized data. Recognizing the theoretical inclinations and value orientations brought into the analytical process is the first step to systematically conceptualize and analyze their impacts. The three-step approach of ＂cause-reason-typology＂ developed in traditional Chinese academia provides a good place to start. Among other Chinese scholars, Mozi noted that ＂argumentation begins with a cause, develops through reason/theory, and extends by typology＂. ＂Cause＂ explores the foundation that a proposition relies on. ＂Reason＂ includes the general logic and principles in it. ＂Typology＂ extends its application by comparison and analogy. When applied to grounded theory, the sequence needs to be adjusted to ＂typology-cause-reason＂. ＂Typology＂, as the first step, offers a categorizing system for initial coding and theoretical extraction. Exploring the ＂cause＂ enables the researcher to analyze the relations between different types and concepts through abstraction,which leads to the reason. This ＂typology-cause-reason＂ procedure is hi-directional. As the meaning systems of the analyst and research subjects interact with each other in the coding process, both meaning systems should be engaged from the beginning. The analytical process of grounded theory is thus ＂interpretive＂, rather than an objective ＂data-processing＂ event. In comparison to abductive reasoning,the ＂typology-cause-reason＂ conception may enable us to explore more deeply into the analytical processes of grounded theory. In doing so,we could endeavor to more accurately dissect and describe the form and style of analysis that take place in the leap from data to theory.