This systematic review evaluates the use of grounded theory methodology (GTM) in library and information science (LIS) research, emphasizing methodological rigour, adherence to foundational principles and the ability to generate substantive theories.
A systematic review of 62 peer-reviewed articles from Scopus, LISA and LISTA was conducted. Data extraction and quality assessment adhered to GTM-specific guidelines, evaluating criteria including theoretical sampling, constant comparison, coding processes and integration with the existing literature.
Although GTM is commonly employed in LIS research, notable variability in methodological rigour was identified. Key deficiencies include limited theoretical sampling, limited memo writing and inconsistent reporting of theoretical saturation. Most studies appeared to prioritise descriptive summaries of research findings over explanatory models, with only three providing formal theories.
This study evaluates the methodological rigour of grounded theory applications in LIS research, highlighting gaps in adherence to essential GTM principles. It identifies significant methodological limitations and offers practical recommendations to enhance rigour, such as iterative data collection, reflexivity through memo writing and improved theoretical sampling. These insights aim to strengthen qualitative research by promoting robust, context-sensitive theories within LIS.
