The Case for Critical Realist Discourse Analysis as a Viable Method in Discursive Work

Abstract

In this reply to Speer's response to our paper we argue that in presenting our method for doing critical realist discourse analysis (CRDA) our paper provided a systematic method from which to do CRDA that was timely, rigorous and significantly different from conversation analysis (CA) in its examination of material practices. We note that our paper addressed a methodological, not epistemological, issue and make a call for a commitment within the discourse analytic community to a valuing of the breadth of methods and approaches in discursive work. We recognize the importance of CA, but also the various versions of discourse analysis that are used in psychology which draw on techniques used in CA, but are not tied to the CA epistemology. These approaches examine normative patterns of language as at least in part a reflection of social relations of power in a given social economic and political/historical context. We conclude by arguing that diversity in research methods is essential. From this perspective, then, CA has an important role to play within discursive psychology, but so do other forms of discursive work, including the CRDA method that we offered in our paper.

Keywords

conversation analysis critical realism discourse analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Billig, M. , Condor, S. , Edwards, D. , Gane, M. , Middleton, D. , & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. London: SAGE .

Charmez, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. London: SAGE .

Daycare Trust. (2001). Quality matters: Ensuring childcare benefits children: Childcare for all: Thinking big 2. London: Author .

Dixon, J. , & Wetherell, M. (2004). On discourse and dirty nappies: Gender, the division of labour and the social psychology of distributive justice . Theory & Psychology, 14, 167—189 .

Gergen, K. (2001). Social construction in context. London: SAGE .

Gill, R. , Henwood, K. , & McLean, C. (2005). Body projects and the regulation of normative masculinity . Body & Society, 11, 37—62 .

Griffin, C. (in press). Being dead and being there: Research interviews, sharing hand cream and the preference for analysing `naturally occurring data '. Discourse Studies.

Miller, T. (2005). Making sense of motherhood: A narrative approach . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .

Potter, J. , & Hepburn, A. (in press). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and prospects . Qualitative Research in Psychology.

10.

Pujol, J. , & Montenegro, M. (1999). In D.J. Nightingale & J. Cromby (Eds.), Social constructionist psychology: A critical analysis of theory and practice (pp. 84—96). Buckingham / Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press .

11.

Schegloff, E.A. (1997). Whose text? Whose context? Discourse & Society, 8, 165—187 .

12.

Sims-Schouten, W. (2004). Ideological and dilemmatic talk of childcare, motherhood and female employment. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Bath .

13.

Sims-Schouten, W. , Riley, S.C.E. , & Willig, C. (2007). Critical realism in discourse analysis: A presentation of a systematic method of analysis using women's talk of motherhood, childcare and female employment as an example . Theory & Psychology , 17, 101—124 .

14.

Speer, S. (2007). On recruiting conversation analysis for critical realist purposes . Theory & Psychology, 17, 125—135 .

15.

Speer, S. (2005). Gender talk: Feminism, discourse and conversation analysis. London: Routledge .

16.

Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue . Discourse & Society, 9, 387—413 .