長久以來，質性研究遭受過於主觀與不夠嚴謹的批評。紮根理論因應這樣的氛圍而生，紮根理論之研究途徑企圖藉由發展系統性的分析模式以理解「過程」、「情境」及「行動」等概念，並對上述批判作出反駁。然而，因為 Strauss 與 Corbin 兩位原作者在論述上的衝突，開啟了一連串對於概念性與方法論上的爭辯與困惑。因此，本文企圖重新審視紮根理論的不同途徑以便釐清其認識論上的矛盾。同時，本文建議以不同「情境」作為驅動個人行動的主要論述，以便對「譯碼典範」作出修正。最後，我們對 Strauss 與 Corbin 的「條件/結果矩陣」作出修正並提出新的矩陣分析模式，以解釋不同「情境」、「行動」及「分析層級」彼此的連結與互動。

Qualitative research has been criticized for the lack of objectivity and scientific rigor. In response to such criticism, grounded theory emerged as a philosophical and analytical approach to studying the process, action, and context of social phenomena. Nevertheless, the controversy between Strauss and Corbin, the founders of grounded theory, has provoked never-ending academic debates. Confusions are inevitably derived respectively from both theoretical foundations and methodological applications. This research is to clarify the epistemological ambivalence involved in the use of grounded theory. It intends to reconcile the seemingly conflicting viewpoints of different grounded theory schools by revisiting diverse philosophical positions of these schools and revising the “coding paradigm” for analyzing the contexts that drive human actions. Accordingly, a new “conditional/ consequential matrix”, as opposed to Strauss and Corbin’s, is proposed to explain the connections and interactions among various contexts, actions, and micro-mess-macro levels of analysis, helping us generate propositions and build theories.