what is a theoretical framework?

What is a theoretical framework, where do you get one, and how does it affect the research and the researcher[1]?

· The researcher starts with some preconceptions – which could be termed bias but Glaser (2002) asserts that this is not so because these notions are acknowledged and described.[2]
· These preconceptions determine the researcher’s personal ontology (what s/he perceives as truth).
· This ontology, in turn, determines the researcher’s proposed defined epistemology (what s/he perceives as knowledge) of a certain situation or context which is under examination.[3]
· Thus, the researcher will develop a set of research questions aimed at interrogating the proposed epistemology.
· The ontological perspective and the epistemological stance will determine the methodology of the investigation (including the methods of data collection and analysis)[4].
· The methodology is validated by these perspectival linkages – the sources of knowledge in the domain chosen by the researcher.
· The whole process described above defines the personal theoretical framework for the particular researcher in the particular context. The exact moment that the framework is defined varies according to the research approach being used (Grounded theory, ethnography, phenomenology, etc.). Framework ≠ methodology. Frameworks in qualitative or mixed methods research can be based upon a mixture of small, medium or grand theories (personal, interpretive or paradigmatic).
· Theoretical frameworks in qualitative or mixed methods research do not necessarily have ‘names’.
· The theoretical framework defined by the researcher is unique, a perception of reality expressed through the data (including literature search) accumulated, analysed and (most importantly) interpreted with clear and thorough descriptions of the context.[5]

References
Anfara, V. A., Jr., and Mertz, N. T. (2006) (eds.) Theoretical Frameworks in Qualitative Research. California, USA: Sage
Glaser, B. G. (2002, September). ‘Constructivist Grounded Theory?’ Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 3, 3 http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-02/3-02glaser-e.htm (accessed 20.02.2004 and 05.03.2004) 24 paragraphs
Pole, C. and Lampard, R. (2002) Practical Social Investigation: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Social Research. (2002) Essex, England: Pearson

[1] Based upon Denzin and Lincoln (2003:30) cited in Anfara and Mertz (2006:xx1): see references for full citation.
[2] It is important to remember Glaser’s points (2002) about the partiality of the researcher. The perspectives of the researcher (in conceptualising the grounded theory) do not affect the way in which the reader acquires it; therefore no bias can reasonably be claimed. We must show a commitment to realism and we cannot be completely objective so partiality is not a failing.
[3] Although Anfara and Mertz (2006: xiv) present a linear relationship from concepts/events to constructs (“clusters of thoughts”) to propositions (or “expressions of relationships among several constructs”) to theory ( “a ‘set’ of propositions”), the process is probably nested or looped, since the researcher may move backwards and forwards between concepts, constructs and propositions before any kind of substantive theory emerges. Even then, the emerging theory may drive the analysis back to the very beginning and start off a new loop.
[4] Pole and Lampard (2002: 132-133) state that it is too simple to view the researcher’s epistemological stance as the main determining factor in choosing a methodology for a particular study. If one’s epistemological stance is related to a personal view of knowledge, then I agree with them. For me, the purpose of research is to extend one’s own view of knowledge – its nature, sources and limits. On the other hand, one’s ontological position may well have a great bearing on the chosen methodology, since it is related to a particular domain of study which has been chosen by the researcher, rather than by the other participants.
Footnotes 2,3 and 4 from my thesis
[5] Silver (1983), cited by Anfara and Mertz (2006: xiv), sees theory as “a unique way perceiving reality, an expression of someone’s profound insight into an aspect of nature”.