Grounded Theory and Autopoietic Social Systems: Are They Methodologically Compatible?

Richard C. Mitchell

doi:10.18778/1733-8077.3.2.06

Authors

Richard C. Mitchell Brock University, Canada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.3.2.06

Keywords:

Autopoietic theory, Grounded systemic theory, Theoretical codes, Transdisciplinarity

Abstract

The paper offers a secondary analysis from a grounded theory doctoral study that reconsiders its “grounded systemic design” (Mitchell, 2005, 2007). While theorists across multiple disciplines fiercely debate the ontological implications of Niklas Luhmann’s autopoietic systems theory (Deflem 1998; Graber and Teubner 1998; King and Thornhill 2003; Mingers 2002; Neves 2001; O’Byrne 2003; Verschraegen 2002, for example), few investigators have yet to adopt his core constructs empirically (see Gregory, Gibson and Robinson 2005 for an exception). Glaser’s (1992, 2005) repeated concerns for grounded theorists to elucidate a “theoretical code” has provided an additional entry point into this project of integrating grounded theory with Luhmann’s abstract conceptual thinking about how global society operates. The author argues that this integration of methodology and systems thinking provides an evolution of grounded theory – rather than its ongoing “erosion” as Greckhamer and Koro-Ljungberg (2005) have feared – and a transportable set of methodological and analytical constructs is presented as a basis for further grounded study.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Richard C. Mitchell, Brock University, Canada

Richard C. Mitchell (PhD) is an Assistant Professor in Child and Youth Studies, Brock University, Canada and completed his doctorate in Sociology and Social Policy with the University of Stirling, Scotland. His standpoint is grounded in critical social pedagogy with a focus on transdisciplinary applications of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. His current teaching looks at human rights within education, mental health, child and youth work, and related professional settings, as well as social policy, citizenship and equity issues for under-eighteens.

References

Babchuk, Wayne (1997) “Glaser or Strauss?: Grounded Theory and Adult Education.” Winning Graduate Student Research Paper from Mid-West Research-to-Practice Conference - Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan October 15-17, 1997. Retrieved 20 June 2007 http://www.canr.msu.edu/dept/aee/research/gradpr96.htm
Google Scholar

Charmaz, Kathy (2000) “Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods.” Pp. 509-535 in Handbook of Qualitative Research - 2nd Edition edited by N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Google Scholar

Corbin, Juliet and Anselm Strauss (1990) “Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria.” Qualitative Sociology 13(1):3-21.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593

Deflem, Mathieu (1998) “The boundaries of abortion law: systems theory from Parsons to Luhmann and Habermas.” Social Forces 76(3):775-818.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3005694

Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonne S. Lincoln, editors (2003) The Landscape of Qualitative Research - Theories and Issues. Second edition. London: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar

Glaser, Barney (1978) Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Google Scholar

Glaser, Barney (1992) Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Google Scholar

Glaser, Barney (2002) “Constructivist grounded theory?” Forum: Qualitative Social Research 3(3). Retrieved 20 June 2007 http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm
Google Scholar

Glaser, Barney (2005) The Grounded Theory Perspective III: Theoretical Coding. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Google Scholar

Glaser, Barney and Anselm Strauss (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014

Graber, Christoph B. and Gunter Teubner (1998) “Art and money: constitutional rights in the private sphere?” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 18:61-73.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/18.1.61

Greckhamer, Thomas and Mirka Koro-Ljungberg (2005) “The Erosion of a Method: Examples from Grounded Theory.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 18(6):729-750.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390500298204

Gregory, Jane (2003) “How do assessments of oral health related quality of life vary between, and change, within individuals?” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. King’s College, London, UK.
Google Scholar

Gregory, Jane, Barry Gibson and Peter G. Robinson (2005) “Variation and change in the meaning of oral health related quality of life: a ‘grounded’ systems approach.” Social Science and Medicine 60:1859-1868.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.039

Hallberg, Lillemor R-M. (2006) “The ’core category’ of grounded theory: Making constant comparisons.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being 1(3):141-148.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620600858399

Hornung, Bernd R. (1998) “Niklas Luhmann, 1927-1998. Obituary Written for the International Sociological Association Bulletin No. 78-79” Retrieved 20 June 2007 http://winningeleven.galeon.com/message.htm
Google Scholar

King, Michael (1994) “Children’s rights as communication: reflections on autopoietic theory and the United Nations Convention.” The Modern Law Review 57(3):385-401.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1994.tb01947.x

King, Michael (1997) A Better World for Children? Explorations in Morality and Authority. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

King, Michael and Anton Schütz (1994) “The ambitious modesty of Niklas Luhmann.” Journal of Law and Society 21(3):261-287.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1410736

King, Michael and Chris Thornhill (2003) Niklas Luhmann’s Theory of Politics and Law. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230503588

Koizumi, Hideaki (2001) “Trans-disciplinarity.” Neuroendocrinology Letters 22:219–221.
Google Scholar

Krentz, Adrienne, Judy Chew and Nancy Arthur (2005) “Recovery from Binge Eating Disorder.” Canadian Journal of Counselling 39(2):118-136.
Google Scholar

Lechner, Frank (2000) “Systems theory and functionalism.” Pp. 112-132 in The Blackwell Companion to Social Theory, Second Edition, edited by B. Turner. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Luhmann, Niklas (1965) Grundrechte als Institution – Ein Beitrag zur politischen Soziologie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Google Scholar

Luhmann, Niklas (1977) “Differentiation of society.” Canadian Journal of Sociology 2(1):29-53.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3340510

Luhmann, Niklas (1982) “The world society as a social system.” International Journal of General Systems 8(2):131-138.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03081078208547442

Luhmann, Niklas (1990) “The cognitive program of constructivism and a reality that remains unknown.” Pp. 64-85 in Self-organization: Portrait of a Scientific Revolution edited by W. Krohn, G. Kuppers and N. Nowotny. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2975-8_5

Luhmann, Niklas (1997) “Globalization or world society - how to conceive modern society?” International Review of Sociology 7(1):67-79.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.1997.9971223

Maturana, Humberto and Francisco Varela (1980) Autopoiesis and Cognition. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8947-4

Mingers, John (2002) “Can social systems be autopoietic? Assessing Luhmann’s social theory.” The Sociological Review 50(2):278-299.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.00367

Mirchandani, Rehka (2005) “Postmodernism and Sociology: From the Epistemological to the Empirical.” Sociological Theory 23(1):86-115.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2005.00244.x

Mitchell, Richard C. (2003a) “Ideological reflections on the DSM-IV-R (or Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, Dorothy!).” Child and Youth Care Forum 32(5):281-298.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025887827899

Mitchell, Richard C. (2003b) “Canadian health care and child rights - what are the links?” Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique 94(6):414-416.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03405076

Mitchell, Richard C. (2005) “Postmodern reflections on the UNCRC: Towards utilising Article 42 as an international compliance indicator.” The International Journal of Children’s Rights 13(3):315-331.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/157181805775007567

Mitchell, Richard C. (2007) “Towards a Transdisciplinary Model within Child and Youth Rights Education.” Chapter IV in The UN Children's Rights Convention: theory meets practice, edited by A. Ang, I. Delens-Ravier, M. Delplace, C. Herman, D. Reynaert, V. Staelens, R. Steel and M. Verheyde. Mortsel: Intersentia.
Google Scholar

Neves, Marcelo de Costa Pinto (2001) “From the autopoiesis to the allopoiesis of law.” Journal of Law and Society 28(2):242-264.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6478.00188

Nicolescu, Basarab (2002) Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity. New York: State University of New York Press.
Google Scholar

O’Byrne, Darren J. (2003) Human Rights – An Introduction. London: Pearson Education.
Google Scholar

Russell, Wendy (2000) “Forging new paths: Transdisciplinarity in Universities.” Wisenet Journal – Australia’s Women in Science Inquiry Network 53. Retrieved 20 June 2007 http://www.wisenet-australia.org/issue53/contnt53.htm
Google Scholar

Schreiber, Rita S. and Phyllis Noerager Stern, editors (2001) Using Grounded Theory in Nursing. New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc.
Google Scholar

Silverman, David (2001) Interpreting Qualitative Data – Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Google Scholar

Somerville, Margaret A. and David J. Rapport, editors (2000) Transdisciplinarity: reCreating Integrated Knowledge. Oxford: EOLSS Publishers Co. Ltd.
Google Scholar

Spencer Brown, George (1969) Laws of Form. London: Allen and Unwin.
Google Scholar

Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin (1998a) Basics of Qualitative Research. Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Second Edition. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Google Scholar

Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin (1998b) “Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview.” Pp. 158-183 in Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Google Scholar

Turner, Bryan (1993) “Outline of a theory of human rights.” Sociology 27(3):489-512.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038593027003009

Verschraegen, Gert (2002) “Human rights and modern society: a sociological analysis from the perspective of systems theory.” Journal of Law and Society 29(20):258-281.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6478.00218

Wolcott, Harry (1994) Transforming Qualitative Data – Description, Analysis, and Interpretation. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Google Scholar