Rigor, Transparency, Evidence, and Representation in Discourse Analysis: Challenges and Recommendations

Abstract

Discourse analysis is an important qualitative research approach across social science disciplines for analyzing (and challenging) how reality in a variety of organizational and institutional arenas is constructed. However, the process of conducting empirical discourse analyses remains challenging. In this article, we identify four key challenges involved in doing discourse analysis and recommend several "tools" derived from empirical practice to address these challenges. We demonstrate these recommendations by drawing on examples from an empirical discourse analysis study we conducted. Our tools and recommendations aim to facilitate conducting and writing up discourse analyses and may also contribute to addressing the identified challenges in other qualitative methodologies.

Dispositivo de Potterheads: Organização Pautada na Ordem do Cânone

“…A análise de discursos é uma abordagem já estabelecida em disciplinas de ciências sociais (Feltham-King & Macleod, 2016;Greckhamer & Cilesiz, 2014). Aqui empregamos a Análise de Discursos Foucaultiana.…”

Discourses of the Rural Rust Belt:

“…This study foregrounds data from meetings where teachers discussed an article from the Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy (Comber, 2015) that explicitly addresses social justice, poverty, and place. To examine the way languagein-use "both creates and reflects the contexts in which it is used" (Gee, 1999, p. 80), we engaged critical discourse analysis (Gee, 1999;Rogers, 2004Rogers, , 2017 and incorporated specific discursive tools of inquiry (Gee, 1999;Greckhamer & Cilesiz, 2014). Our critical discourse analysis approach foregrounded the "constitutive relationship between discourse and the social world" (Rogers, 2004, p. 1) in which discourse can never be truly bounded (Gee, 1999).…”

“…We followed steps to discourse analysis laid out by Lester and Paulus (2011) through (a) repeated readings of transcripts; (b) selection, organization, and identification of patterns-ours based on discursive building steps (e.g., political, knowledge, identity; Gee, 1999;Greckhamer & Cilesiz, 2014); (c) generation of explanations; (d) noting variability; and (e) reflexive and transparent documentation of our claims. The transcripts were developed by the researcher present at the teacher study groups.…”

“…We drew on Greckhamer and Cilesiz (2014), to develop a shared analytic tool in the form of Google Sheets spreadsheets that included the full transcript of the source and columns for each of seven discourse building blocks (Significance, Activity, Identity, Connection, Relationship, Political, Sign System/Knowledge). This tool was used for independent analysis and to develop shared explanations and definitions of the blocks within the transcript using the commenting, highlighting, and suggesting features on Google.…”

“…After eight months of regularly scheduled videobased meetings and phone conversations in addition to use of the commenting feature on shared Google documents and e-mail, we began to reflexively construct a written report of our findings, continuing to meet, comment on, and question our reporting tools (Greckhamer & Cilesiz, 2014) and language. As a regular part of our analysis we probed our roles as researchers-for Alex as a participant in the data, and for Jenny as data outsider.…”