For the analysis of disciplinary identity-building processes, we selected a qualitative sociological research approach, based on the method of 'grounded theory' [33]. It consists of a case study analysis [34] within the research field of particle- and inhalation toxicology and an empirical study. We also worked with qualitative interviews and the problem-centered interview method [35]. This allows for the combination of narrative elements with a manual structure, which enables the consideration of background knowledge [36]. In our research we interviewed fifteen leading scientists from Germany, Holland, Switzerland and the USA, all of whom are analyzing the potential health impacts of nano-scale particles. We recruited our interview partners through the method of'theoretical sampling' [37]. With this method we did not chose a representative sample following the usual criteria of sample selection, e.g., the coincidence principle. We rather selected persons, participants, and representative institutions, with regard to their potential for contributing to the research project. Hence, neither the extent nor the characteristics of the sample were fixed in advance. In addition, theoretical sampling allows the selection of new participants, whose relevance only shows up during the research process. Sample selection was terminated when theoretical saturation was reached [38]. Theoretical saturation is reached when the insights gained per additional interview declines.
Qualitative research, and the approach of 'grounded theory' distinguish themselves in not working with preliminarily defined variables. Rather, the analytical codes are directly extracted from the interview-sequences. Along those codes, which build up the subsequent result section, the arguments are worked out [39].
Answers to all your Biology Questions
