Skip to main content
Log in

A Purposeful Approach to the Constant Comparative Method in the Analysis of Qualitative Interviews

  • Published:
Quality and Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The constant comparative method (CCM) together with theoretical sampling constitutethe core of qualitative analysis in the grounded theory approach and in other types ofqualitative research. Since the application of the method remains rather unclear, researchers do not know how to `go about' the CCM in their research practice. This study contributes to a purposeful approach of the CCM in order to systematize the analysis process and to increase the traceability and verification of the analyses. The step by step approach is derived from and illustrated with an empirical study into the experience of multiple sclerosis (MS) by patients and their spousal care providers. In this study five different steps were distinguished on the basis of four criteria: (1) the data involved and the overall analysis activities, (2) the aim, (3) the results and (4) the questions asked. It is concluded that systematization of qualitative analysis results from the researcher using a sound plan for conducting CCM regarding these four aspects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boeije, H. R., Bromberger, N., Duijnstee, M. S. H., Grypdonck, M. H. F. & Pool, A. (1999). In relatie tot MS. Zorgafhankelijke mensen met Multiple Sclerose en hun partners. Utrecht: NIZW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chenitz, W. C. & Swanson, J. M. (eds.) (1986). From Practice to Grounded Theory: Qualitative Research in Nursing. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative Data Analysis. A User Friendly Guide for Social Scientists. London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1965). Awareness of Dying. Chicago: Aldine Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (1992). Emergence vs. Forcing. Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimchi, J., Polivka, B. & Stevenson, J. S. (1991). Triangulation. Operational definitions. Nursing Research 40: 120-123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuckartz, U. (1998). WinMAX 97. Scientific Text Analysis for the Social Sciences. Berlin.

  • Layder, D. (1993). New Strategies in Social Research. An Introduction and Guide. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, J. M. & Field, P. A. (1998). Nursing Research of Qualitative Approaches. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative Inquiry. A Dictionary of Terms. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sivesind, K. H. (1999). Structured, qualitative comparison. Quality and Quantity 33: 361-380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research. Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative Research. Analysis Types and Software. London: Falmer press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wester, F. (1995). Strategieë n voor kwalitatief onderzoek. Muiderberg: Coutinho.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boeije, H. A Purposeful Approach to the Constant Comparative Method in the Analysis of Qualitative Interviews. Quality & Quantity 36, 391–409 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020909529486

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020909529486

Navigation