Search:
Computing and Library Services - delivering an inspiring information environment

Society and communities in social constructionism and discourse analysis

Burr, Vivien (2005) Society and communities in social constructionism and discourse analysis. In: Texts, Interaction and Communities: Qualitative Approaches to Society and Social Action, May, 2005, Tampere, Finland. (Unpublished)

[img]
Preview
PDF
BurrPaper_v2pdf.pdf - Accepted Version

Download (122kB) | Preview
[img]
Preview
PDF
burrKeynotepdf.pdf - Presentation

Download (1MB) | Preview
[img] Microsoft Word
BurrPaper_v2.doc - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only

Download (95kB)
[img] Microsoft PowerPoint
burrKeynote.ppt - Presentation
Restricted to Repository staff only

Download (119kB)

Abstract

As a psychologist, I am fortunate to work in a University Psychology Dept that acknowledges the place and value of qualitative research in the discipline, as is the case here in Tampere. It is easy to forget that, within the discipline as a whole, the vision of ‘science’ that is held up for us to emulate is still one that exhorts us to strive for objectivity and the quantification of psychological phenomena. So presenting at this conference is an opportunity for me to reflect upon what it is that psychologists are aiming for when they make a case for the use of qualitative methods. It is also an opportunity to consider the extent to which specific qualitative methods help us to achieve those aims. In this paper, I want to consider discourse analysis as a qualitative methodology and ask to what extent it s capable of fulfilling at least some of the aims of qualitative research. I will be using ‘social constructionism’ as an umbrella term to cover the theoretical ,positions I want to critique. In the USA, SC is equated with the work of Kenneth Gergen, but I will be using the term to also include the worlk of poststructuralist writers, particularly those adopting a Foucauldian approach. And mirroring this, I will broadly divide DA into two forms, Discursive Psychology and Foucauldian Discourse Analysis, and take each in turn, discussing their relative merits and the problems I think they raise. In particular, I will argue that, because of their theoretical assumptions, both forms of discourse analysis are, for different reasons, problematic in terms of their ability to give ‘voice’ to individuals and communities whose experiences are often marginalised within society.

Item Type: Conference or Workshop Item (Paper)
Subjects: H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
H Social Sciences > HT Communities. Classes. Races
Schools: School of Human and Health Sciences
School of Human and Health Sciences > Centre for Applied Psychological Research
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Sara Taylor
Date Deposited: 24 May 2012 09:05
Last Modified: 24 May 2012 09:05
URI: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/13701

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Repository Staff Only: item control page

View Item View Item

University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH Copyright and Disclaimer All rights reserved ©