From the Editor’s Desk

A few weeks ago, I received an email from a colleague who had submitted a paper to a highly regarded, high impact journal. The study was well designed and well described as a classic grounded theory. As often happens, a peer reviewer for the journal was not familiar with the tenets and procedures o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Alvita Nathaniel
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sociology Press 2023-06-01
Series:Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/104
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849426032259497984
author Alvita Nathaniel
author_facet Alvita Nathaniel
author_sort Alvita Nathaniel
collection DOAJ
description A few weeks ago, I received an email from a colleague who had submitted a paper to a highly regarded, high impact journal. The study was well designed and well described as a classic grounded theory. As often happens, a peer reviewer for the journal was not familiar with the tenets and procedures of classic grounded theory. Since research methods, procedures, and language vary among the varieties of classic and remodeled grounded theory methods are not interchangeable with those of classic grounded theory, the peer reviewer’s suggestion was inaccurate and inappropriate. Yet like many classic grounded theorists, the author needed to find a way to satisfy a reviewer who was unfamiliar with the specifics of the method. This is a tightrope that many classic grounded theorists walk— trying to appease poorly informed peer reviewers and journal editors while avoiding language that violates the major premises of classic grounded theory. This is never the case with The Grounded Theory Review.
format Article
id doaj-art-c980432616cf4e99b7541fcd70a2e3d7
institution Kabale University
issn 1556-1542
1556-1550
language English
publishDate 2023-06-01
publisher Sociology Press
record_format Article
series Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal
spelling doaj-art-c980432616cf4e99b7541fcd70a2e3d72025-08-20T03:29:34ZengSociology PressGrounded Theory Review: An International Journal1556-15421556-15502023-06-012201From the Editor’s DeskAlvita Nathaniel A few weeks ago, I received an email from a colleague who had submitted a paper to a highly regarded, high impact journal. The study was well designed and well described as a classic grounded theory. As often happens, a peer reviewer for the journal was not familiar with the tenets and procedures of classic grounded theory. Since research methods, procedures, and language vary among the varieties of classic and remodeled grounded theory methods are not interchangeable with those of classic grounded theory, the peer reviewer’s suggestion was inaccurate and inappropriate. Yet like many classic grounded theorists, the author needed to find a way to satisfy a reviewer who was unfamiliar with the specifics of the method. This is a tightrope that many classic grounded theorists walk— trying to appease poorly informed peer reviewers and journal editors while avoiding language that violates the major premises of classic grounded theory. This is never the case with The Grounded Theory Review. https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/104Research Publishinggrounded theoryGrounded Theory Review
spellingShingle Alvita Nathaniel
From the Editor’s Desk
Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal
Research Publishing
grounded theory
Grounded Theory Review
title From the Editor’s Desk
title_full From the Editor’s Desk
title_fullStr From the Editor’s Desk
title_full_unstemmed From the Editor’s Desk
title_short From the Editor’s Desk
title_sort from the editor s desk
topic Research Publishing
grounded theory
Grounded Theory Review
url https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/104
work_keys_str_mv AT alvitanathaniel fromtheeditorsdesk