I love digging in to methods, but a thing I'm really noticing: a lot of beloved ones (e.g. Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis) go so far into the "how to think" piece that it becomes borderline ableist. Not everyone is neurotypical, not everyone thinks in the same order/way.

TBH, this is part of my deep love for/obsession with constructivist grounded theory - the back-and-forth supports my ADHD mind, and the way Charmaz wrote it up it's clear that there are a bunch of valid ways to think through a grounded theory problem.

Anyway, if you're writing up a methods piece, and someone tells you that you have to spell out an exact style of thinking which can not be violated..... ignore them, you're talking to a bad scientist who is also maybe sorta a jerk.

(I'm not writing up a methods piece rn, this is general guidance)