Newman Et Al.\'s Work of Literature, \"A

¶ … Newman et al.'s work of literature, "A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods," there is a critical link between a research question and the purpose of that research. The identification of the purpose for research questions inevitably leads one to the most efficacious way of conducting that research (Newman et al., p. 168). The authors seem to be alluding to the fact that the purpose of the research is more influential than that of the question itself, a point that carries a poignant sense of gravity in analyzing the research question in Ralph LaRossa's work " Grounded theory methods and qualitative family research." The author makes his purpose quite explicit, he is attempting to offer "an interpretation" (LaRossa p. 838, 2005) as to the meaning of many of the terms and methodologies involved with grounded theory methods (GTM), of which there is no little ambiguity and outright confusion over the conflicting ideas of researchers throughout the years regarding this particular approach towards qualitative studies.

As such, his research question is decidedly simple, and certain defers to his overall purpose in terms of its validity. After readily acknowledging the myriad conflicting viewpoints regarding the structure and typology of GTM, the entire question that this article is founded upon is simply "Is there a solution?" (LaRossa p. 838, 2005) to the confusion surrounding a research methodology that can bring considerable value to social science research -- if only students and researchers can figure out what it is, and how to use it accordingly.

Thus, LaRossa's strategy of inquiry is largely based on elucidating the historical beginnings and interpretations of the phenomena of GTM, defining some of the key terms related to it (coding and its "three major phases…open, axial and selective) (LaRossa p. 837), and analyzing a series of examples in which this methodology was used in some real-life research projects as examples of its efficacy. This strategy of inquiry enables the author to explain what and how he is pursuing his research purpose, which is the reason why he has constructed this particular research question (Newman et al., p. 168). There are several interesting facets of this approach to clarifying a concept that author himself describes as "opaque" (LaRossa p. 838, 2005). One is that in taking such a partisan approach (which is exemplified by the fact that despite there being many different -- and disputed -- phases of coding, the author has decided on championing three of them) (LaRossa p. 840, 2005), he is using a methodology that is more associated with quantitative research -- in which one declares a hypothesis, and then investigates it. This sort of mixed-methods approach, of course, is well aligned with the mixed-methods approach of GTM in general, which shares a substantial degree of "compatibility with quantitative research" (LaRossa p. 837, 2005). As such he conducts no new research while exploring the answer to his research question.