<![CDATA[Background: Grounded theory remains a foundational qualitative methodology for generating theories from empirical data; however, researchers frequently face challenges regarding paradigmatic variations, literature management, and analytical rigor. Objective: This study synthesizes seminal and contemporary literature to clarify core methodological choices, structural tensions, and emerging digital adaptations in grounded theory practice. Method: A comprehensive synthesis of scholarly literature was conducted, examining methodological divergences between Glaserian, Straussian, and constructivist frameworks alongside innovative extensions such as netnography. Results: The analysis highlights critical operational choices in coding procedures, theoretical sampling, literature review timing, and the integration of digital data environments. Researcher positionality and reflexivity emerge as essential mechanisms for maintaining trustworthiness throughout analysis. Conclusion: Embracing methodological pluralism and reflexive documentation enhances transparency and theoretical depth, equipping qualitative researchers to develop rigorous, contextually meaningful theories. Contribution: This study contributes an integrative conceptual framework bridging traditional grounded theory traditions, reflexive practice, and netnographic inquiry. This provides a practical pedagogical guide for operationalizing reflexivity and maintaining methodological transparency when analyzing digitally mediated social interactions.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
