Speer2007
| Speer2007 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Speer2007 |
| Author(s) | Susan A. Speer |
| Title | On recruiting conversation analysis for critical realist purposes |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Discourse Analysis, Critical discourse analysis |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2007 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Theory & Psychology |
| Volume | 17 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 125–135 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0959354307073155 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In this paper I provide a summary and evaluation of some of the key features of Sims-Schouten, Riley and Willig's multi-level, `critical realist' approach to discourse analysis, as exemplified in their study of motherhood, childcare and female employment. I argue that (i) their analyses recruit and depend on arguments and techniques from the very perspectives they criticize, and (ii) those techniques are deployed in a somewhat ad hoc fashion. Consequently, I suggest that the authors fail to provide a distinctive or systematic operationalization of a critical realist discourse analysis. I end by arguing that if critical realists really want to understand what (purportedly extra-discursive) factors account for why participants say what they do, then they need to begin by adopting a more reflexive approach to their data, and pay serious attention to analysing the interview as an interview, and as an occasion for interaction in its own right.
Notes
