نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار، گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.

2 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

در سال‌های اخیر استفاده از روش نظریه زمینه‌ای در نظام‌های علمی مرتبط با محیط ساخته شده و به طور خاص طراحی و برنامه‌ریزی شهری افزایش یافته است. از طرفی، عدم توجه کافی پژوهشگران به مبانی و ملاحظات روش‌شناختی نظریه زمینه‌ای و خوانش‌های آن، گاهی به گونه‌ای از روش‌شناسی با خوانش‌های التقاطی منجر شده که فاقد و ناقض ماهیت روش نظریه زمینه‌ای و ملاحظات اولیه خوانش موردنظر از آن بوده است. با این وجود، بررسی و ارزیابی کیفیت این‌گونه پژوهش‌ها در نظام‌های علمی مرتبط با محیط ساخته شده و به طور خاص طراحی و برنامه‌ریزی شهری کمتر انجام شده است. از این رو هدف مطالعه حاضر، ارزیابی نظام‌مندِ مطالعه‌های انجام شده با استفاده از روش نظریه زمینه‌ای در برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری به منظور شناخت استفاده اصولی از این روش در این عرصه از دانش و ارائه پیشنهاداتی برای کاربردهای آتی است. در این راستا  انتخاب پژوهش‌های مورد بررسی با جست وجوی نظام‌مند مقالات منتشر شده در پایگاه‌های معتبر علمی فارسی‌زبان با استفاده از روش مرور نظام‌مند انجام شده است. پس از غربالگری مطالعات موجود بر اساس معیارهای مشخص شده، 44 مطالعه منتشر شده تا سال 1399 انتخاب و بر اساس معیارهای ارزیابی روش نظریه زمینه‌ای مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. نتایج ارزیابی روش‌شناختی پژوهش‌های انجام شده مبتنی بر روش نظریه زمینه‌ای نشان داد با وجود اقبال فزاینده به استفاده از این روش در مطالعات حوزه برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری، بسیاری از این پژوهش‌ها در کاربست کامل و دقیق اصول و مراحل روش نظریه زمینه‌ای و خوانش‌های آن ناموفق بوده‌اند و نتیجه آنها به جای نظریه به عنوان دستاورد مورد انتظار از کاربست این روش به صورت دیاگرام، مدل و چارچوب مفهومی تنزل پیدا کرده است. همچنین نتایج بررسی حاضر نشان داد بهره‌گیری صرف برخی پژوهش‌ها از مجموعه‌ای از تکنیک‌های روش نظریه زمینه‌ای مانند کدگذاری و یا نگارش یادداشت‌های تحلیلی و غفلت از فرایندهای مهمی از قبیل نمونه‌گیری نظری، مقایسه مستمر و تحلیل عمیق مقوله‌ها موجب شده تا این مطالعه‌ها از عرصه توصیف فراتر نرفته و ضمن اکتفا به ارائه تم‌ها و روایت‌های تشریحی، کمتر به تولید نظریه به عنوان هدف روش نظریه زمینه‌ای دست یابند. بر اساس یافته‌های این مقاله، ارتقای کیفیت پژوهش‌های مبتنی بر روش نظریه زمینه‌ای در حوزه برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری نیازمند شناخت صحیح پژوهشگران از ماهیت، ویژگی‌ها و اصول نظریه زمینه‌ای و آگاهی عمیق از خوانش‌های این روش و تفاوت‌های آنها به منظور تناسب‌سنجی و توجیه انتخاب خوانش مناسب بر اساس اهداف و ویژگی‌های پژوهش است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of the application of grounded theory methodology principles in Persian urban planning and design research

نویسندگان [English]

  • Bahador Zamani 1
  • Ehsan Babaei Salanghooch 2

1 Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Urban Planning, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Highlights

High-quality grounded theory methodology (GTM) research in urban planning and design requires a deep understanding of GTM’s nature, versions, characteristics, and core principles.
Lack of adherence to all GTM principles can hinder the primary goal of GTM: theory generation.
Many GTM studies reviewed in this paper could have applied a more accurate version of GTM.
GTM research in urban planning and design should clearly present evidence of key actions taken during data collection and analysis.

Introduction
In recent years, grounded theory methodology (GTM) has become more prevalent in research fields related to the built environment, especially urban planning and design. However, a lack of thorough understanding of GTM’s foundational principles and versions has often led to research with eclectic interpretations of GTM, sometimes diverging from GTM’s fundamental aims and processes. This study systematically evaluates GTM-based research in urban planning and design, aiming to understand the adherence to GTM’s essential principles within these studies and to provide recommendations for future research.
Theoretical Framework
GTM has evolved significantly since its inception by Glaser and Strauss, with various adaptations. Early on, Leonard Schatzman’s development of dimensional analysis marked a significant shift (Schatzman 1991). Kathy Charmaz, a student of both founders, advanced constructivist grounded theory. Adele Clarke, another prominent figure in GTM’s development, integrated Strauss’s social worlds and arenas framework with situational analysis (Clarke 2005; Clarke et al. 2018). Numerous other adaptations have since emerged, including critical realist GTM (Oliver 2011), transformational GTM (Redman-MacLaren and Mills 2015), multi-grounded theory (Goldkuhl and Cronholm 2010), and feminist GTM (Wuest 1995). Despite these variations, GTM’s core principles remain central across adaptations, including simultaneous data collection and analysis, data coding, constant comparison, theoretical sampling, theoretical saturation, memo writing, and integrating the theoretical framework within existing literature (Charmaz 2014; Corbin and Strauss 2014).
Methodology
This study conducted a systematic review across Persian-language scientific databases, including the Jahad Daneshgahi Scientific Information Center, the Comprehensive Humanities Portal, and Noor Specialized Journals, encompassing a broad range of fields like art, architecture, and social sciences. The search yielded 834 articles, of which duplicate and non-peer-reviewed articles were excluded. Studies were further narrowed down to those authored by urban planning professionals or featuring urban planning participants, specifically employing GTM as the sole research method or methodology. Articles from other disciplines, such as architecture and tourism, were excluded. Inclusion criteria focused on Persian-language articles published between 1967 (the year GTM was introduced) and 2020, specifically on urban design and planning and explicitly using GTM.
Descriptive characteristics, including author(s), publication year, purpose, data collection methods, applied GTM version, and role of GTM in the research, were extracted for analysis. This assessment was based on the quality guideline by Hutchinson et al. (2011).
Results
Out of the reviewed studies, 32 (73%) justified their use of GTM. GTM’s role varied:

1 study (2%) described GTM as a methodology
32 studies (73%) as a method
12 studies (29%) as an approach
5 studies (11%) as an approach (repeated category)
2 studies (5%) as a data analysis tool Four studies (11%) referenced GTM without specifying its methodological role.

Regarding GTM versions used:

8 studies (18%) did not specify a version
29 studies (66%) used the Strauss and Corbin version
2 studies (5%) used Charmaz’s constructivist version
1 study (2%) referenced Glaser’s approach
1 study (2%) referenced Clarke’s situational analysis
3 studies (7%) used a combination of versions.

In terms of adherence to GTM principles, studies showed varied application levels. Only one study applied all seven GTM principles. Other studies used between one to six principles, with one study applying none. For outcomes:

7 studies (16%) achieved theory generation
6 studies (14%) presented descriptive themes and narratives
29 studies (67%) used diagrams or models
1 study (2%) presented a conceptual framework
1 study (2%) reported a paradigm model.

Overall, this evaluation indicated that while GTM is increasingly used in urban planning and design research, many studies have not fully applied GTM’s principles. Consequently, their outputs often consist of descriptive themes or diagrams rather than theoretical contributions. Some studies applied only select GTM techniques, such as coding, without employing processes like theoretical sampling and constant comparison, limiting them to descriptive results rather than theory building.
Conclusion
This study’s findings indicate that to improve GTM research quality in urban planning and design, researchers must thoroughly understand GTM’s nature, versions, and core principles. A deep comprehension of different GTM versions allows for selecting the most suitable approach for the research’s goals and objectives, ensuring robust theory generation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Grounded Theory Methodology
  • Urban Planning
  • Urban Design
  • Systematic Review
Aeeni, M., & Abdolhosseinzadeh, M. (2017). Analyzing the Quality of Representing the concept of Political Legitimacy in the Discourse of Iran’s Constitutional Ulama. The Journal of Political Thought in Islam, 4(11), 127-165. [in Persian] 
Afsari, A., Seyed Al-Hosseini, s. m., Daneshvar, M., & Seghatoleslami, A. (2019). Designing a Model for Controlling and Handling the Power Exercising Environment for Urban Planning Process Based on Grounded Theory; a Case Study of Mashhad Metropolis. Geographical-Research, 34(4), 517-526. https://doi.org/10.29252/geores.34.4.517  [in Persian]  
Ali, N., May, S., & Grafton, K. (2018). A systematic review of grounded theory studies in physiotherapy. Physiotherapy theory and practice, 35(12), 1139-1169. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2018.1474403 
Amsteus, M. N. (2014). The validity of divergent grounded theory method. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691401300133 
Azadfallah, Z., Karkabadi, Z., & Arghan, A. (2020). The role of the virtual city in good governance and sustainable tourism development   (Case study of District 12 of Tehran). Journal of Tourism Planning and Development, 9(33), 247-272. https://doi.org/10.22080/jtpd.2020.16921.3110 [in Persian]
Azizi, M. M., Zebardast, E., & Bornafar, M. (2019). Conceptualizing the process of converting rural settlements into cities in Guilān province (1956-2016). Urban Planning Knowledge, 3(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.22124/upk.2019.11905.1151 
Babaei Salanghooch, E., Masoud, M., & Rabiei, K. (2018). Explaining the Characteristics and Components of Good City in Iran-Shahri Thought. National Studies Journal, 19(76), 67-84. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.1735059.1397.19.76.4.9 [in Persian]  
Babaei Salanghooch, E., Massoud, M., & Rabie, K. (2018). Explaining the Characteristics and Components of Islamic City with Situational Analysis. JRIA, 6(2), 1-18. [in Persian] 
Bach, S., & Dorostkar, E. (2017). Making the Soundscape Map of the City Using the Grounded Theory and Nvivo Application (Case Study: the District 12 of Tehran). Journal of Environmental Studies, 43(2), 267-284. https://doi.org/10.22059/jes.2017.63078 [in Persian]  
Bainbridge, R., Whiteside, M., & McCalman, J. (2013). Being, knowing, and doing: A phronetic approach to constructing grounded theory with Aboriginal Australian partners. Qualitative Health Research, 23(2), 275-288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312467853 
Belfrage, C., & Hauf, F. (2017). The gentle art of retroduction: Critical realism, cultural political economy and critical grounded theory. Organization Studies, 38(2), 251-271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616663239 
Belfrage, C. A., & Hauf, F. (2015). Operationalizing cultural political economy: towards critical grounded theory. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 4(3), 324-340. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOE-01-2015-0002 
Belgrave, L. L., & Seide, K. (2019). Grounded theory methodology: Principles and practices. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_84 
Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide. Sage.
Bryant, A. (2009). Grounded theory and pragmatism: The curious case of Anselm Strauss. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 10, No 3. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-10.3.1358     
Bryant, A. (2017). Grounded theory and grounded theorizing: Pragmatism in research practice. Oxford University Press.
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. Denzin (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 509-535). Sage. 
Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded Theory. In J. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods (pp. 81-110). Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2008). Constructionism and the grounded theory method. In J. Holstein & J. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (Vol. 1, pp. 397-412).
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. sage.
Charmaz, K. (2017). Special invited paper: Continuities, contradictions, and critical inquiry in grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917719350 
Charmaz, K., & Belgrave, L. (2012). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. Gubrium, J. Holstein, A. Marvasti, & K. McKinney (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft (Vol. 2, pp. 347-365).
Cheer, K., MacLaren, D., & Tsey, K. (2015). The use of grounded theory in studies of nurses and midwives’ coping processes: A systematic literature search. Contemporary Nurse, 51(2-3), 200-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/10376178.2016.1157445 
Christiansen, O. (2007). A simpler understanding of classic GT: How it is a fundamentally different methodology. The grounded theory review, 6(3), 39-61.
Clarke Adele, E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Sage Publications.
Clarke, A. E., Friese, C., & Washburn, R. S. (2018). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the interpretive turn. Sage publications.
Clarke, A. E., Washburn, R., & Friese, C. (2016). Situational analysis in practice: Mapping research with grounded theory. Routledge.
Coffey, A. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Sage.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1998). Basics of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research (4th ed.). sage.
Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (2007). Shadowing: And other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies. Copenhagen Business School Press DK.
Dadashpoor, H., & Arasteh, M. (2017). Understanding Spatial Relationships of Iran Southern Region and Hinterlands : A Grounded Theory Strategy (Case Study:Shiraz, Bushehr and BandarAbbas Spatial Triangle). mdrsjrns, 21(3), 145-187. [in Persian] 
Daneshvar, M., Ghaffari, A., & Majedi, H. (2019). A Grounded Theory Approach to the Application of Structural-Strategic Plans in Iran’s Urban Planning Syste. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 12(27), 155-165. https://doi.org/10.22034/aaud.2019.92458 [in Persian]  
Denzin, N. K. (2007). Grounded theory and the politics of interpretation. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp. 454-471). Sage.
Dey, I. (2003). Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists. Routledge.
Dunne, C. (2011). The place of the literature review in grounded theory research. International journal of social research methodology, 14(2), 111-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2010.494930 
Fallahi, A., & Aslani, F. (2016). Reconstruction of Bazaar District, after the 2003 Bam Earthquake, from the Collective Memory Perspective. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 20(4), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2016.59672 [in Persian]
Flick, U. (2018). Doing Grounded Theory. Sage.
Ganjloo, A., & Saeedi Mofrad, S. (2019). Analysis the position of Non-governmental Organizations and Community Based Organization about Informal Settlement empowering through Grounded Theory method. Geographical-Research, 34(4), 483-491. https://doi.org/10.29252/geores.34.4.483 [in Persian]
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence vs Forcing. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1993). Examples of grounded theory: A reader. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1979). Awareness of dying. Transaction Publishers.
Glasser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing.
Goharinasab, E., Zabihi, H., & Toghyani, S. (2019). An inquary on how to apply the approach of of Residents in Codification of conceptual concepts of the Persistent Iranian Neighbourhood updated with uses the Grounded theory method.(Case study: Oudlajan, Fahaadaan, Jolfa, Narmak and Ekbatan Neighborhoods). Applied Researches in Geographical Sciences, 19(54), 103-123. https://doi.org/10.29252/jgs.19.54.103 [in Persian]
Goldkuhl, G., & Cronholm, S. (2010). Adding theoretical grounding to grounded theory: Toward multi-grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(2), 187-205. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691000900205 
Goulding, C. (1998). Grounded theory: the missing methodology on the interpretivist agenda. Qualitative Market Research: an international journal, 1(1), 50-57. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522759810197587 
Gurd, B. (2008). Remaining consistent with method? An analysis of grounded theory research in accounting. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 5(2), 122-138. https://doi.org/10.1108/11766090810888926 
Hesam, M., & Aghaeizadeh, E. (2017). Identifying the Challenges Rasht Citizens Face for Walking Using Grounded Theory. Journal of Geography and Regional Development, 14(2), 201-224. https://doi.org/10.22067/geography.v14i2.55360 [in Persian]   
Hesam, M., & Aghaeizadeh, E. (2018). Examination of the Reasons for the Slight Tendency of Tourists to Survive in Rasht. urban tourism, 5(1), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.22059/jut.2018.232906.313 [in Persian]   
Hesam, M., Aghaeezadeh, E., & Rezaali, M. (2018). The Obstacles to Achieve a Clean City Based on Garbage Collection Using Grounded Theory (Case Study: Rasht). Human Geography Research, 50(3), 773-790. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.20086296.1397.50.3.15.2 [in Persian]  
Hosseini Siahgoli, M., & Ghadami, M. (2016). The factors affecting the changes in the urban planning system of using grounded theory. Territory(1), 31-50. [in Persian]  
Houshmand, M., Saeede Zarabadi, Z. S., Majedi, H., & Nouri, S. A. (2020). Providing a Conceptual Model of the Underground Space as an Urban Development Catalyst Using the Grounded Theory. Geographical-Research, 35(1), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.29252/geores.35.1.55 [in Persian]
Hutchison, A. J., Johnston, L., & Breckon, J. (2011). Grounded theory-based research within exercise psychology: A critical review. Qualitative research in Psychology, 8(3), 247-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780880903304527
Joudi Gollar, p., & Sharifzadegan, M. H. (2020). Manifestation of practical judgements in tidal behaviors of Tehran metropolitan’s Urban Planners. Urban Structure and Function Studies, 7(23), 57-83. https://doi.org/10.22080/usfs.2020.16527.1805 [in Persian] 
Joudi Gollar, P., & Sharifzadegan, M. H. (2019). The Institutional Behavior of Planners in the Urban Planning Discourse of Tehran Metropolis. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 23(4), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2019.268934.672154 [in Persian]   
Karimimoshaver, M., Sajjadzadeh, H., & Troosheh, H. (2020). The relationship between height of tall buildings and mental health of citizens (Case study: Saeediyeh complex of Hamadan). Motaleate Shahri, 9(33), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.34785/J011.2019.303 [in Persian]
Khorshidian, E., Mohammadnia Gharaee, F., & Ostadi, M. (2019). Identifying the Needs of Youth in Establishing Social Interactions in the Context of Temporary Landscape of Mashhad City, Iran, Based on the Grounded Theory. Geographical-Research, 34(2), 165-174. https://doi.org/10.29252/geores.34.2.165 [in Persian]   
Lak, A. (2015a). Experience of Re-establishing Place Attachment in Post-Earthquake Reconstructions in Bam’s Neighborhoods Using Grounded Theory Method Case Study: Emamzade Zeyd and Ghasre Hamid Neighborhoods. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, 8(15), 159-178. https://doi.org/10.30480/aup.2015.16 [in Persian]
lak, A. (2015b). Bam Earthquake and Neighborhoods’ Residents’Understanding of Meaning of Disruption in Place Attachment. Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 34(152), 17-30. [in Persian]
lak, A., & Gholampour, A. (2015). Understanding the Meaning of “Sense of Place” in Post-Earthquake Reconstructions in Bam Residential Settlements Case Study: Narges Residential Complex)). Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 34(149), 37-50. [in Persian]
Mahmoudi Azar, S., & Davoudpour, Z. (2018). Urban Branding for the Realization of the Creative City; Providing a Fundamental Data Theory (Case Study Urmia City). Community Development (Rural and Urban), 10(1), 115-136. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrd.2018.68414 [in Persian]
Mansoori, K., Masoud, M., & Izadi, M. S. (2019). Recognition of Effective Factors of the Formation of Historical Cemeteries By Focusing on Historical Cemeteries of Tehran. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 16(75), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2019.59571.2708 [in Persian]
Martin, P. Y., & Turner, B. A. (1986). Grounded Theory and Organizational Research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(2), 141-157. https://doi.org/10.1177/002188638602200207 
Matavire, R., & Brown, I. (2013). Profiling grounded theory approaches in information systems research. European Journal of information systems, 22(1), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.1057/EJIS.2011.35  
Mills, J., Bonner, A., & Francis, K. (2006). The Development of Constructivist Grounded Theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500103 
Mohamadnia, M., Daneshpour, S. A., & Seyedalhosseini, S. M. (2019). Determining the Place Dignity Model and Studying Its Various Dimensions. Geographical-Research, 34(2), 193-201. https://doi.org/10.29252/geores.34.2.193 [in Persian]
Montgomery, P., & Bailey, P. H. (2007). Field Notes and Theoretical Memos in Grounded Theory. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 29(1), 65-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945906292557 
Morse, J. M. (2016). Tussles, tensions, and resolutions. In J. M. Morse, B. Bowers, K. Charmaz, J. Corbin, E. Clarke Adele, & P. N. Stern (Eds.), Developing grounded theory (pp. 13-22). Routledge.
Mottaqi, T., Rafi‘eian, M., & Saremi, H.-r. (2022). Stakeholder Conflict Analysis in Urban Historic Areas: Sangelaj Buffer Zone Plan in Tehran as a Case Study. Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies, 9(17), 197-218. https://doi.org/10.22052/9.17.197 [in Persian]
Nouri, M. j., & Etessam, I. (2017). Why Pedestrianization Projects in Iran Fail, Case Study: 17 Shahrivar Street in Tehran. Soffeh, 27(1), 89-108. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.1683870.1396.27.1.6.6 [in Persian]   
Oliver, C. (2012). Critical realist grounded theory: A new approach for social work research. British journal of social work, 42(2), 371-387. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcr064 
Pourhosein Roshan, H., & Dadashpour, H. (2018). Women Perception Of Urban Spaces After The Development Plan Using The Grounded Theory. Woman Cultural Psychology(1), 101-115. [in Persian]  
Rafipour, S., Dadashpour, H., & Taghvaee, A. A. (2017). A Qualitative Study of effective Agents on the destruction of Gardens in Tehran Metropolis based on Grounded Theory approach. Motaleate Shahri, 6(23), 3-16. [in Persian]
Rastegar, E., Motiee Langaroudi, S. H., Dadvar Khani, F., Faraji Sabokbar, H. A., & Darabi, H. (2015). Explaining the motivations of international migrants remittances with grounded theory a case study: Lamerd township. Journal of Rural Research, 6(3), 613-634. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrur.2015.56062 [in Persian]
Razzaghi Asl, S., Mahdavinia, M., Faizi, M., & Daneshpour, A. (2010). Identification of Vertical Urban Design & its Implementing Requisites in Tehran. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 7(13), 3-16. [in Persian]  
Redman-MacLaren, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Transformational grounded theory: Theory, voice, and action. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691501400301 
Saadati, S. P., Mozafar, F., & Hojat, I. (2018). Identifying Effective Factors in Creating Home Attachment Based Using Grounded Theory (Case Study: Residential Units in Isfahan. Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 37(164), 85-100. https://doi.org/10.22034/37.164.85 [in Persian]
Sadeghzadeh, S., Golkar, K., Ghaffari, A., & Lak, A. (2020). The Experience on the Decision-making Process of Urban Design Projects. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, 12(25), 63-84. https://doi.org/10.30480/aup.2020.758 [in Persian]
Saremi, H., Khosravi, N., & Safavi, A. (2020). Understanding Tourism Impacts on the Sense of Place in Destinations: A Grounded Theory Strategy (Case Study: Lavasan). Journal of Tourism Planning and Development, 9(32), 39-53. https://doi.org/10.22080/jtpd.2020.18515.3260 [in Persian]   
Schatzman, L. (1991). Dimensional analysis: Notes on an alternative approach to the grounding of theory in qualitative research. In D. Maines (Ed.), Social organization and social process: Essays in honor of Anselm Strauss. 303, 314. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Sage Publications, Inc.
Sharifzadegan, M. H., & Ghanouni, H. (2017). A Theoretical Analysis & Conceptualization of the Effects of Rentier States on Society's Agency and Structure and Urban Economy of Iran. Urban Economics, 2(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.22108/ue.2017.79473.0 [in Persian] 
Sobhiyah, M. H., & Radaiee, A. (2015). The Realization of Objectives and Plans of “Maskan-e Mehr” program in Mahdasht Project. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 12(33), 91-106. [in Persian]
Soleimani, M., & Mandgary, K. (2016). Iranian traditional home aesthetics: Recognition aesthetics elements based on Grounded Theory(Case Study: Yazd). Hoviatshahr, 10(4), 67-78. [in Persian]
Strauss, A. (1994). Grounded Theory Method ology: An Overview. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research/Sage (pp. 273-285). Sage Publications, Inc.
Tan, J. (2010). Grounded theory in practice: Issues and discussion for new qualitative researchers. Journal of documentation, 66(1), 93-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411011016380  
Tayyebi, A., & Zekavat, K. (2017). Exploring Iranian Tourists’ Image of Isfahan using Grounded Theory. Soffeh, 27(2), 63-78. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.1683870.1396.27.2.5.7 [in Persian] 
Thornberg, R. (2012). Informed grounded theory. Scandinavian journal of educational research, 56(3), 243-259. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2011.581686 
Thornberg, R., & Charmaz, K. (2011). Grounded Theory. In S. Lapan, M. Quartaroli, & F. Reimer (Eds.), Qualitative Research: An Introduction to Methods and Designs (pp. 41-68). Jossey- Bass.
Timonen, V., Foley, G., & Conlon, C. (2018). Challenges when using grounded theory: A pragmatic introduction to doing GT research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1609406918758086. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918758086 
Tonekaboni, B., & Shahabian, P. (2018). Recognition of Social and Cultural Norms in Urban Public Spaces of Tehran Baharan Tonekanoni[1] , Pouyan Shahabiyan[2] Receive: 3/10/2017 Accept: 11/11/2017. Social Development & Welfare Planning, 9(35), 229-257. https://doi.org/10.22054/qjsd.2018.9315 [in Persian]   
Tonekaboni, B., Shahabian, P., & Modiri, A. (2018). Recognition and Analysis of Essence, Social - Cultural Changes and Evolutions in Contemporary Urban Public Spaces of Tehran. Sociological Cultural Studies, 8(4), 1-24. [in Persian]   
Vahidi Borji, G., Nourian, F., & Azizi, M. (2017). The Obstacles against the Success of Suggested Functions in Urban Development Projects in Iran. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 22(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2017.62261 [in Persian]   
Wuest, J. (1995). Feminist grounded theory: An exploration of the congruency and tensions between two traditions in knowledge discovery. Qualitative Health Research, 5(1), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239500500109