the research discourse analysis

Home » Discourse Analysis – Methods, Types and Examples

Discourse Analysis – Methods, Types and Examples

Table of Contents

Discourse Analysis

Definition:

Discourse Analysis is a method of studying how people use language in different situations to understand what they really mean and what messages they are sending. It helps us understand how language is used to create social relationships and cultural norms.

It examines language use in various forms of communication such as spoken, written, visual or multi-modal texts, and focuses on how language is used to construct social meaning and relationships, and how it reflects and reinforces power dynamics, ideologies, and cultural norms.

Types of Discourse Analysis

Some of the most common types of discourse analysis are:

Conversation Analysis

This type of discourse analysis focuses on analyzing the structure of talk and how participants in a conversation make meaning through their interaction. It is often used to study face-to-face interactions, such as interviews or everyday conversations.

Critical discourse Analysis

This approach focuses on the ways in which language use reflects and reinforces power relations, social hierarchies, and ideologies. It is often used to analyze media texts or political speeches, with the aim of uncovering the hidden meanings and assumptions that are embedded in these texts.

Discursive Psychology

This type of discourse analysis focuses on the ways in which language use is related to psychological processes such as identity construction and attribution of motives. It is often used to study narratives or personal accounts, with the aim of understanding how individuals make sense of their experiences.

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

This approach focuses on analyzing not only language use, but also other modes of communication, such as images, gestures, and layout. It is often used to study digital or visual media, with the aim of understanding how different modes of communication work together to create meaning.

Corpus-based Discourse Analysis

This type of discourse analysis uses large collections of texts, or corpora, to analyze patterns of language use across different genres or contexts. It is often used to study language use in specific domains, such as academic writing or legal discourse.

Descriptive Discourse

This type of discourse analysis aims to describe the features and characteristics of language use, without making any value judgments or interpretations. It is often used in linguistic studies to describe grammatical structures or phonetic features of language.

Narrative Discourse

This approach focuses on analyzing the structure and content of stories or narratives, with the aim of understanding how they are constructed and how they shape our understanding of the world. It is often used to study personal narratives or cultural myths.

Expository Discourse

This type of discourse analysis is used to study texts that explain or describe a concept, process, or idea. It aims to understand how information is organized and presented in such texts and how it influences the reader’s understanding of the topic.

Argumentative Discourse

This approach focuses on analyzing texts that present an argument or attempt to persuade the reader or listener. It aims to understand how the argument is constructed, what strategies are used to persuade, and how the audience is likely to respond to the argument.

Discourse Analysis Conducting Guide

Here is a step-by-step guide for conducting discourse analysis:

What are you trying to understand about the language use in a particular context?
What are the key concepts or themes that you want to explore?
Select the data: Decide on the type of data that you will analyze, such as written texts, spoken conversations, or media content. Consider the source of the data, such as news articles, interviews, or social media posts, and how this might affect your analysis.
Transcribe or collect the data: If you are analyzing spoken language, you will need to transcribe the data into written form. If you are using written texts, make sure that you have access to the full text and that it is in a format that can be easily analyzed.
Read and re-read the data: Read through the data carefully, paying attention to key themes, patterns, and discursive features. Take notes on what stands out to you and make preliminary observations about the language use.
Develop a coding scheme : Develop a coding scheme that will allow you to categorize and organize different types of language use. This might include categories such as metaphors, narratives, or persuasive strategies, depending on your research question.
Code the data: Use your coding scheme to analyze the data, coding different sections of text or spoken language according to the categories that you have developed. This can be a time-consuming process, so consider using software tools to assist with coding and analysis.
Analyze the data: Once you have coded the data, analyze it to identify patterns and themes that emerge. Look for similarities and differences across different parts of the data, and consider how different categories of language use are related to your research question.
Interpret the findings: Draw conclusions from your analysis and interpret the findings in relation to your research question. Consider how the language use in your data sheds light on broader cultural or social issues, and what implications it might have for understanding language use in other contexts.
Write up the results: Write up your findings in a clear and concise way, using examples from the data to support your arguments. Consider how your research contributes to the broader field of discourse analysis and what implications it might have for future research.

Applications of Discourse Analysis

Here are some of the key areas where discourse analysis is commonly used:

Political discourse: Discourse analysis can be used to analyze political speeches, debates, and media coverage of political events. By examining the language used in these contexts, researchers can gain insight into the political ideologies, values, and agendas that underpin different political positions.
Media analysis: Discourse analysis is frequently used to analyze media content, including news reports, television shows, and social media posts. By examining the language used in media content, researchers can understand how media narratives are constructed and how they influence public opinion.
Education : Discourse analysis can be used to examine classroom discourse, student-teacher interactions, and educational policies. By analyzing the language used in these contexts, researchers can gain insight into the social and cultural factors that shape educational outcomes.
Healthcare : Discourse analysis is used in healthcare to examine the language used by healthcare professionals and patients in medical consultations. This can help to identify communication barriers, cultural differences, and other factors that may impact the quality of healthcare.
Marketing and advertising: Discourse analysis can be used to analyze marketing and advertising messages, including the language used in product descriptions, slogans, and commercials. By examining these messages, researchers can gain insight into the cultural values and beliefs that underpin consumer behavior.

When to use Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is a valuable research methodology that can be used in a variety of contexts. Here are some situations where discourse analysis may be particularly useful:

When studying language use in a particular context: Discourse analysis can be used to examine how language is used in a specific context, such as political speeches, media coverage, or healthcare interactions. By analyzing language use in these contexts, researchers can gain insight into the social and cultural factors that shape communication.
When exploring the meaning of language: Discourse analysis can be used to examine how language is used to construct meaning and shape social reality. This can be particularly useful in fields such as sociology, anthropology, and cultural studies.
When examining power relations: Discourse analysis can be used to examine how language is used to reinforce or challenge power relations in society. By analyzing language use in contexts such as political discourse, media coverage, or workplace interactions, researchers can gain insight into how power is negotiated and maintained.
When conducting qualitative research: Discourse analysis can be used as a qualitative research method, allowing researchers to explore complex social phenomena in depth. By analyzing language use in a particular context, researchers can gain rich and nuanced insights into the social and cultural factors that shape communication.

Examples of Discourse Analysis

Here are some examples of discourse analysis in action:

A study of media coverage of climate change: This study analyzed media coverage of climate change to examine how language was used to construct the issue. The researchers found that media coverage tended to frame climate change as a matter of scientific debate rather than a pressing environmental issue, thereby undermining public support for action on climate change.
A study of political speeches: This study analyzed political speeches to examine how language was used to construct political identity. The researchers found that politicians used language strategically to construct themselves as trustworthy and competent leaders, while painting their opponents as untrustworthy and incompetent.
A study of medical consultations: This study analyzed medical consultations to examine how language was used to negotiate power and authority between doctors and patients. The researchers found that doctors used language to assert their authority and control over medical decisions, while patients used language to negotiate their own preferences and concerns.
A study of workplace interactions: This study analyzed workplace interactions to examine how language was used to construct social identity and maintain power relations. The researchers found that language was used to construct a hierarchy of power and status within the workplace, with those in positions of authority using language to assert their dominance over subordinates.

Purpose of Discourse Analysis

The purpose of discourse analysis is to examine the ways in which language is used to construct social meaning, relationships, and power relations. By analyzing language use in a systematic and rigorous way, discourse analysis can provide valuable insights into the social and cultural factors that shape communication and interaction.

The specific purposes of discourse analysis may vary depending on the research context, but some common goals include:

To understand how language constructs social reality: Discourse analysis can help researchers understand how language is used to construct meaning and shape social reality. By analyzing language use in a particular context, researchers can gain insight into the cultural and social factors that shape communication.
To identify power relations: Discourse analysis can be used to examine how language use reinforces or challenges power relations in society. By analyzing language use in contexts such as political discourse, media coverage, or workplace interactions, researchers can gain insight into how power is negotiated and maintained.
To explore social and cultural norms: Discourse analysis can help researchers understand how social and cultural norms are constructed and maintained through language use. By analyzing language use in different contexts, researchers can gain insight into how social and cultural norms are reproduced and challenged.
To provide insights for social change: Discourse analysis can provide insights that can be used to promote social change. By identifying problematic language use or power imbalances, researchers can provide insights that can be used to challenge social norms and promote more equitable and inclusive communication.

Characteristics of Discourse Analysis

Here are some key characteristics of discourse analysis:

Focus on language use: Discourse analysis is centered on language use and how it constructs social meaning, relationships, and power relations.
Multidisciplinary approach: Discourse analysis draws on theories and methodologies from a range of disciplines, including linguistics, anthropology, sociology, and psychology.
Systematic and rigorous methodology: Discourse analysis employs a systematic and rigorous methodology, often involving transcription and coding of language data, in order to identify patterns and themes in language use.
Contextual analysis : Discourse analysis emphasizes the importance of context in shaping language use, and takes into account the social and cultural factors that shape communication.
Focus on power relations: Discourse analysis often examines power relations and how language use reinforces or challenges power imbalances in society.
Interpretive approach: Discourse analysis is an interpretive approach, meaning that it seeks to understand the meaning and significance of language use from the perspective of the participants in a particular discourse.
Emphasis on reflexivity: Discourse analysis emphasizes the importance of reflexivity, or self-awareness, in the research process. Researchers are encouraged to reflect on their own positionality and how it may shape their interpretation of language use.

Advantages of Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis has several advantages as a methodological approach. Here are some of the main advantages:

Provides a detailed understanding of language use: Discourse analysis allows for a detailed and nuanced understanding of language use in specific social contexts. It enables researchers to identify patterns and themes in language use, and to understand how language constructs social reality.
Emphasizes the importance of context : Discourse analysis emphasizes the importance of context in shaping language use. By taking into account the social and cultural factors that shape communication, discourse analysis provides a more complete understanding of language use than other approaches.
Allows for an examination of power relations: Discourse analysis enables researchers to examine power relations and how language use reinforces or challenges power imbalances in society. By identifying problematic language use, discourse analysis can contribute to efforts to promote social justice and equality.
Provides insights for social change: Discourse analysis can provide insights that can be used to promote social change. By identifying problematic language use or power imbalances, researchers can provide insights that can be used to challenge social norms and promote more equitable and inclusive communication.
Multidisciplinary approach: Discourse analysis draws on theories and methodologies from a range of disciplines, including linguistics, anthropology, sociology, and psychology. This multidisciplinary approach allows for a more holistic understanding of language use in social contexts.

Limitations of Discourse Analysis

Some Limitations of Discourse Analysis are as follows:

Time-consuming and resource-intensive: Discourse analysis can be a time-consuming and resource-intensive process. Collecting and transcribing language data can be a time-consuming task, and analyzing the data requires careful attention to detail and a significant investment of time and resources.
Limited generalizability: Discourse analysis is often focused on a particular social context or community, and therefore the findings may not be easily generalized to other contexts or populations. This means that the insights gained from discourse analysis may have limited applicability beyond the specific context being studied.
Interpretive nature: Discourse analysis is an interpretive approach, meaning that it relies on the interpretation of the researcher to identify patterns and themes in language use. This subjectivity can be a limitation, as different researchers may interpret language data differently.
Limited quantitative analysis: Discourse analysis tends to focus on qualitative analysis of language data, which can limit the ability to draw statistical conclusions or make quantitative comparisons across different language uses or contexts.
Ethical considerations: Discourse analysis may involve the collection and analysis of sensitive language data, such as language related to trauma or marginalization. Researchers must carefully consider the ethical implications of collecting and analyzing this type of data, and ensure that the privacy and confidentiality of participants is protected.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

Cluster Analysis – Types, Methods and Examples

Discriminant Analysis – Methods, Types and...

MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance) –...

Documentary Analysis – Methods, Applications and...

ANOVA (Analysis of variance) – Formulas, Types...

Graphical Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

What (Exactly) Is Discourse Analysis? A Plain-Language Explanation & Definition (With Examples)

By: Jenna Crosley (PhD). Expert Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2021

Discourse analysis is one of the most popular qualitative analysis techniques we encounter at Grad Coach. If you’ve landed on this post, you’re probably interested in discourse analysis, but you’re not sure whether it’s the right fit for your project, or you don’t know where to start. If so, you’ve come to the right place.

Overview: Discourse Analysis Basics

In this post, we’ll explain in plain, straightforward language :

What discourse analysis is
When to use discourse analysis
The main approaches to discourse analysis
How to conduct discourse analysis

What is discourse analysis?

Let’s start with the word “discourse”.

In its simplest form, discourse is verbal or written communication between people that goes beyond a single sentence . Importantly, discourse is more than just language. The term “language” can include all forms of linguistic and symbolic units (even things such as road signs), and language studies can focus on the individual meanings of words. Discourse goes beyond this and looks at the overall meanings conveyed by language in context . “Context” here refers to the social, cultural, political, and historical background of the discourse, and it is important to take this into account to understand underlying meanings expressed through language.

A popular way of viewing discourse is as language used in specific social contexts, and as such language serves as a means of prompting some form of social change or meeting some form of goal.

Now that we’ve defined discourse, let’s look at discourse analysis .

Discourse analysis uses the language presented in a corpus or body of data to draw meaning . This body of data could include a set of interviews or focus group discussion transcripts. While some forms of discourse analysis center in on the specifics of language (such as sounds or grammar), other forms focus on how this language is used to achieve its aims. We’ll dig deeper into these two above-mentioned approaches later.

As Wodak and Krzyżanowski (2008) put it: “discourse analysis provides a general framework to problem-oriented social research”. Basically, discourse analysis is used to conduct research on the use of language in context in a wide variety of social problems (i.e., issues in society that affect individuals negatively).

For example, discourse analysis could be used to assess how language is used to express differing viewpoints on financial inequality and would look at how the topic should or shouldn’t be addressed or resolved, and whether this so-called inequality is perceived as such by participants.

What makes discourse analysis unique is that it posits that social reality is socially constructed , or that our experience of the world is understood from a subjective standpoint. Discourse analysis goes beyond the literal meaning of words and languages

For example, people in countries that make use of a lot of censorship will likely have their knowledge, and thus views, limited by this, and will thus have a different subjective reality to those within countries with more lax laws on censorship.

When should you use discourse analysis?

There are many ways to analyze qualitative data (such as content analysis , narrative analysis , and thematic analysis ), so why should you choose discourse analysis? Well, as with all analysis methods, the nature of your research aims, objectives and research questions (i.e. the purpose of your research) will heavily influence the right choice of analysis method.

The purpose of discourse analysis is to investigate the functions of language (i.e., what language is used for) and how meaning is constructed in different contexts, which, to recap, include the social, cultural, political, and historical backgrounds of the discourse.

For example, if you were to study a politician’s speeches, you would need to situate these speeches in their context, which would involve looking at the politician’s background and views, the reasons for presenting the speech, the history or context of the audience, and the country’s social and political history (just to name a few – there are always multiple contextual factors).

Discourse analysis can also tell you a lot about power and power imbalances , including how this is developed and maintained, how this plays out in real life (for example, inequalities because of this power), and how language can be used to maintain it. For example, you could look at the way that someone with more power (for example, a CEO) speaks to someone with less power (for example, a lower-level employee).

Therefore, you may consider discourse analysis if you are researching:

Some form of power or inequality (for example, how affluent individuals interact with those who are less wealthy
How people communicate in a specific context (such as in a social situation with colleagues versus a board meeting)
Ideology and how ideas (such as values and beliefs) are shared using language (like in political speeches)
How communication is used to achieve social goals (such as maintaining a friendship or navigating conflict)

As you can see, discourse analysis can be a powerful tool for assessing social issues , as well as power and power imbalances . So, if your research aims and objectives are oriented around these types of issues, discourse analysis could be a good fit for you.

discourse analysis is good for analysing power

Discourse Analysis: The main approaches

There are two main approaches to discourse analysis. These are the language-in-use (also referred to as socially situated text and talk ) approaches and the socio-political approaches (most commonly Critical Discourse Analysis ). Let’s take a look at each of these.

Approach #1: Language-in-use

Language-in-use approaches focus on the finer details of language used within discourse, such as sentence structures (grammar) and phonology (sounds). This approach is very descriptive and is seldom seen outside of studies focusing on literature and/or linguistics.

Because of its formalist roots, language-in-use pays attention to different rules of communication, such as grammaticality (i.e., when something “sounds okay” to a native speaker of a language). Analyzing discourse through a language-in-use framework involves identifying key technicalities of language used in discourse and investigating how the features are used within a particular social context.

For example, English makes use of affixes (for example, “un” in “unbelievable”) and suffixes (“able” in “unbelievable”) but doesn’t typically make use of infixes (units that can be placed within other words to alter their meaning). However, an English speaker may say something along the lines of, “that’s un-flipping-believable”. From a language-in-use perspective, the infix “flipping” could be investigated by assessing how rare the phenomenon is in English, and then answering questions such as, “What role does the infix play?” or “What is the goal of using such an infix?”

Need a helping hand?

Approach #2: Socio-political

Socio-political approaches to discourse analysis look beyond the technicalities of language and instead focus on the influence that language has in social context , and vice versa. One of the main socio-political approaches is Critical Discourse Analysis , which focuses on power structures (for example, the power dynamic between a teacher and a student) and how discourse is influenced by society and culture. Critical Discourse Analysis is born out of Michel Foucault’s early work on power, which focuses on power structures through the analysis of normalized power .

Normalized power is ingrained and relatively allusive. It’s what makes us exist within society (and within the underlying norms of society, as accepted in a specific social context) and do the things that we need to do. Contrasted to this, a more obvious form of power is repressive power , which is power that is actively asserted.

Sounds a bit fluffy? Let’s look at an example.

Consider a situation where a teacher threatens a student with detention if they don’t stop speaking in class. This would be an example of repressive power (i.e. it was actively asserted).

Normalized power, on the other hand, is what makes us not want to talk in class . It’s the subtle clues we’re given from our environment that tell us how to behave, and this form of power is so normal to us that we don’t even realize that our beliefs, desires, and decisions are being shaped by it.

In the view of Critical Discourse Analysis, language is power and, if we want to understand power dynamics and structures in society, we must look to language for answers. In other words, analyzing the use of language can help us understand the social context, especially the power dynamics.

While the above-mentioned approaches are the two most popular approaches to discourse analysis, other forms of analysis exist. For example, ethnography-based discourse analysis and multimodal analysis. Ethnography-based discourse analysis aims to gain an insider understanding of culture , customs, and habits through participant observation (i.e. directly observing participants, rather than focusing on pre-existing texts).

On the other hand, multimodal analysis focuses on a variety of texts that are both verbal and nonverbal (such as a combination of political speeches and written press releases). So, if you’re considering using discourse analysis, familiarize yourself with the various approaches available so that you can make a well-informed decision.

How to “do” discourse analysis

As every study is different, it’s challenging to outline exactly what steps need to be taken to complete your research. However, the following steps can be used as a guideline if you choose to adopt discourse analysis for your research.

Step 1: Decide on your discourse analysis approach

The first step of the process is to decide on which approach you will take in terms. For example, the language in use approach or a socio-political approach such as critical discourse analysis. To do this, you need to consider your research aims, objectives and research questions . Of course, this means that you need to have these components clearly defined. If you’re still a bit uncertain about these, check out our video post covering topic development here.

While discourse analysis can be exploratory (as in, used to find out about a topic that hasn’t really been touched on yet), it is still vital to have a set of clearly defined research questions to guide your analysis. Without these, you may find that you lack direction when you get to your analysis. Since discourse analysis places such a focus on context, it is also vital that your research questions are linked to studying language within context.

Based on your research aims, objectives and research questions, you need to assess which discourse analysis would best suit your needs. Importantly, you need to adopt an approach that aligns with your study’s purpose . So, think carefully about what you are investigating and what you want to achieve, and then consider the various options available within discourse analysis.

It’s vital to determine your discourse analysis approach from the get-go , so that you don’t waste time randomly analyzing your data without any specific plan.

Step 2: Design your collection method and gather your data

Once you’ve got determined your overarching approach, you can start looking at how to collect your data. Data in discourse analysis is drawn from different forms of “talk” and “text” , which means that it can consist of interviews , ethnographies, discussions, case studies, blog posts.

The type of data you collect will largely depend on your research questions (and broader research aims and objectives). So, when you’re gathering your data, make sure that you keep in mind the “what”, “who” and “why” of your study, so that you don’t end up with a corpus full of irrelevant data. Discourse analysis can be very time-consuming, so you want to ensure that you’re not wasting time on information that doesn’t directly pertain to your research questions.

When considering potential collection methods, you should also consider the practicalities . What type of data can you access in reality? How many participants do you have access to and how much time do you have available to collect data and make sense of it? These are important factors, as you’ll run into problems if your chosen methods are impractical in light of your constraints.

Once you’ve determined your data collection method, you can get to work with the collection.

Step 3: Investigate the context

A key part of discourse analysis is context and understanding meaning in context. For this reason, it is vital that you thoroughly and systematically investigate the context of your discourse. Make sure that you can answer (at least the majority) of the following questions:

What is the discourse?
Why does the discourse exist? What is the purpose and what are the aims of the discourse?
When did the discourse take place?
Where did it happen?
Who participated in the discourse? Who created it and who consumed it?
What does the discourse say about society in general?
How is meaning being conveyed in the context of the discourse?

Make sure that you include all aspects of the discourse context in your analysis to eliminate any confounding factors. For example, are there any social, political, or historical reasons as to why the discourse would exist as it does? What other factors could contribute to the existence of the discourse? Discourse can be influenced by many factors, so it is vital that you take as many of them into account as possible.

Once you’ve investigated the context of your data, you’ll have a much better idea of what you’re working with, and you’ll be far more familiar with your content. It’s then time to begin your analysis.

Step 4: Analyze your data

When performing a discourse analysis, you’ll need to look for themes and patterns . To do this, you’ll start by looking at codes , which are specific topics within your data. You can find more information about the qualitative data coding process here.

Next, you’ll take these codes and identify themes. Themes are patterns of language (such as specific words or sentences) that pop up repeatedly in your data, and that can tell you something about the discourse. For example, if you’re wanting to know about women’s perspectives of living in a certain area, potential themes may be “safety” or “convenience”.

In discourse analysis, it is important to reach what is called data saturation . This refers to when you’ve investigated your topic and analyzed your data to the point where no new information can be found. To achieve this, you need to work your way through your data set multiple times, developing greater depth and insight each time. This can be quite time consuming and even a bit boring at times, but it’s essential.

Once you’ve reached the point of saturation, you should have an almost-complete analysis and you’re ready to move onto the next step – final review.

Step 5: Review your work

Hey, you’re nearly there. Good job! Now it’s time to review your work.

This final step requires you to return to your research questions and compile your answers to them, based on the analysis. Make sure that you can answer your research questions thoroughly, and also substantiate your responses with evidence from your data.

Usually, discourse analysis studies make use of appendices, which are referenced within your thesis or dissertation. This makes it easier for reviewers or markers to jump between your analysis (and findings) and your corpus (your evidence) so that it’s easier for them to assess your work.

When answering your research questions, make you should also revisit your research aims and objectives , and assess your answers against these. This process will help you zoom out a little and give you a bigger picture view. With your newfound insights from the analysis, you may find, for example, that it makes sense to expand the research question set a little to achieve a more comprehensive view of the topic.

Let’s recap…

In this article, we’ve covered quite a bit of ground. The key takeaways are:

Discourse analysis is a qualitative analysis method used to draw meaning from language in context.
You should consider using discourse analysis when you wish to analyze the functions and underlying meanings of language in context.
The two overarching approaches to discourse analysis are language-in-use and socio-political approaches .
The main steps involved in undertaking discourse analysis are deciding on your analysis approach (based on your research questions), choosing a data collection method, collecting your data, investigating the context of your data, analyzing your data, and reviewing your work.

If you have any questions about discourse analysis, feel free to leave a comment below. If you’d like 1-on-1 help with your analysis, book an initial consultation with a friendly Grad Coach to see how we can help.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

30 Comments

This was really helpful to me

I would like to know the importance of discourse analysis analysis to academic writing

In academic writing coherence and cohesion are very important. DA will assist us to decide cohesiveness of the continuum of discourse that are used in it. We can judge it well.

Thank you so much for this piece, can you please direct how I can use Discourse Analysis to investigate politics of ethnicity in a particular society

Fantastically helpful! Could you write on how discourse analysis can be done using computer aided technique? Many thanks

I would like to know if I can use discourse analysis to research on electoral integrity deviation and when election are considered free & fair

I also to know the importance of discourse analysis and it’s purpose and characteristics

Thanks, we are doing discourse analysis as a subject this year and this helped a lot!

Please can you help explain and answer this question? With illustrations,Hymes’ Acronym SPEAKING, as a feature of Discourse Analysis.

What are the three objectives of discourse analysis especially on the topic how people communicate between doctor and patient

Very useful Thank you for your work and information

thank you so much , I wanna know more about discourse analysis tools , such as , latent analysis , active powers analysis, proof paths analysis, image analysis, rhetorical analysis, propositions analysis, and so on, I wish I can get references about it , thanks in advance

Its beyond my expectations. It made me clear everything which I was struggling since last 4 months. 👏 👏 👏 👏

Thank you so much … It is clear and helpful

Thanks for sharing this material. My question is related to the online newspaper articles on COVID -19 pandemic the way this new normal is constructed as a social reality. How discourse analysis is an appropriate approach to examine theese articles?

This very helpful and interesting information

This was incredible! And massively helpful.

I’m seeking further assistance if you don’t mind.

Found it worth consuming!

What are the four types of discourse analysis?

very helpful. And I’d like to know more about Ethnography-based discourse analysis as I’m studying arts and humanities, I’d like to know how can I use it in my study.

Amazing info. Very happy to read this helpful piece of documentation. Thank you.

is discourse analysis can take data from medias like TV, Radio…?

I need to know what is general discourse analysis

Direct to the point, simple and deep explanation. this is helpful indeed.

Thank you so much was really helpful

really impressive

Thank you very much, for the clear explanations and examples.

It is really awesome. Anybody within just in 5 minutes understand this critical topic so easily. Thank you so much.

Thank you for enriching my knowledge on Discourse Analysis . Very helpful thanks again

This was extremely helpful. I feel less anxious now. Thank you so much.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Print Friendly

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

Knowledge Base
Methodology
Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples

Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples

Published on 5 May 2022 by Amy Luo . Revised on 5 December 2022.

Discourse analysis is a research method for studying written or spoken language in relation to its social context. It aims to understand how language is used in real-life situations.

When you do discourse analysis, you might focus on:

The purposes and effects of different types of language
Cultural rules and conventions in communication
How values, beliefs, and assumptions are communicated
How language use relates to its social, political, and historical context

Discourse analysis is a common qualitative research method in many humanities and social science disciplines, including linguistics, sociology, anthropology, psychology, and cultural studies. It is also called critical discourse analysis.

What is discourse analysis used for, how is discourse analysis different from other methods, how to conduct discourse analysis.

Conducting discourse analysis means examining how language functions and how meaning is created in different social contexts. It can be applied to any instance of written or oral language, as well as non-verbal aspects of communication, such as tone and gestures.

Materials that are suitable for discourse analysis include:

Books, newspapers, and periodicals
Marketing material, such as brochures and advertisements
Business and government documents
Websites, forums, social media posts, and comments
Interviews and conversations

By analysing these types of discourse, researchers aim to gain an understanding of social groups and how they communicate.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Unlike linguistic approaches that focus only on the rules of language use, discourse analysis emphasises the contextual meaning of language.

It focuses on the social aspects of communication and the ways people use language to achieve specific effects (e.g., to build trust, to create doubt, to evoke emotions, or to manage conflict).

Instead of focusing on smaller units of language, such as sounds, words, or phrases, discourse analysis is used to study larger chunks of language, such as entire conversations, texts, or collections of texts. The selected sources can be analysed on multiple levels.

Discourse analysis is a qualitative and interpretive method of analysing texts (in contrast to more systematic methods like content analysis ). You make interpretations based on both the details of the material itself and on contextual knowledge.

There are many different approaches and techniques you can use to conduct discourse analysis, but the steps below outline the basic structure you need to follow.

Step 1: Define the research question and select the content of analysis

To do discourse analysis, you begin with a clearly defined research question . Once you have developed your question, select a range of material that is appropriate to answer it.

Discourse analysis is a method that can be applied both to large volumes of material and to smaller samples, depending on the aims and timescale of your research.

Step 2: Gather information and theory on the context

Next, you must establish the social and historical context in which the material was produced and intended to be received. Gather factual details of when and where the content was created, who the author is, who published it, and whom it was disseminated to.

As well as understanding the real-life context of the discourse, you can also conduct a literature review on the topic and construct a theoretical framework to guide your analysis.

Step 3: Analyse the content for themes and patterns

This step involves closely examining various elements of the material – such as words, sentences, paragraphs, and overall structure – and relating them to attributes, themes, and patterns relevant to your research question.

Step 4: Review your results and draw conclusions

Once you have assigned particular attributes to elements of the material, reflect on your results to examine the function and meaning of the language used. Here, you will consider your analysis in relation to the broader context that you established earlier to draw conclusions that answer your research question.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

Luo, A. (2022, December 05). Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 21 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/discourse-analysis-explained/

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked

Case study | definition, examples & methods, how to do thematic analysis | guide & examples, content analysis | a step-by-step guide with examples.

- Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

Access provided by Google Indexer
My email alerts
BMA member login
Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

Advanced search
Search responses
Search blogs

Discourse analysis

Related content
Peer review
Brian David Hodges , associate professor, vice chair (education), and director 1 ,
Ayelet Kuper , assistant professor 2 ,
Scott Reeves , associate professor 3
1 Department of Psychiatry, Wilson Centre for Research in Education, University of Toronto, 200 Elizabeth Street, Eaton South 1-565, Toronto, ON, Canada M5G 2C4
2 Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, and Wilson Centre for Research in Education, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Room HG 08, Toronto, ON, Canada M4N 3M5
3 Department of Psychiatry, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Centre for Faculty Development, and Wilson Centre for Research in Education, University of Toronto, 200 Elizabeth Street, Eaton South 1-565, Toronto, ON, Canada M5G 2C4
Correspondence to: B D Hodges brian.hodges{at}utoronto.ca

This articles explores how discourse analysis is useful for a wide range of research questions in health care and the health professions

Previous articles in this series discussed several methodological approaches used by qualitative researchers in the health professions. This article focuses on discourse analysis. It provides background information for those who will encounter this approach in their reading, rather than instructions for conducting such research.

What is discourse analysis?

Discourse analysis is about studying and analysing the uses of language. Because the term is used in many different ways, we have simplified approaches to discourse analysis into three clusters (table 1 ⇓ ) and illustrated how each of these approaches might be used to study a single domain: doctor-patient communication about diabetes management (table 2 ⇓ ). Regardless of approach, a vast array of data sources is available to the discourse analyst, including transcripts from interviews, focus groups, samples of conversations, published literature, media, and web based materials.

Three approaches to discourse analysis

View inline

Three approaches to a specific research question: example of doctor-patient communications about diabetes management

What is formal linguistic discourse analysis?

The first approach, formal linguistic discourse analysis, involves a structured analysis of text in order to find general underlying rules of linguistic or communicative function behind the text. 4 For example, Lacson and colleagues compared human-human and machine-human dialogues in order to study the possibility of using computers to compress human conversations about patients in a dialysis unit into a form that physicians could use to make clinical decisions. 5 They transcribed phone conversations between nurses and 25 adult dialysis patients over a three month period and coded all 17 385 words by semantic type (categories of meaning) and structure (for example, sentence length, word position). They presented their work as a “first step towards an automatic analysis of spoken medical dialogue” that would allow physicians to “answer questions related to patient care by looking at [computer generated] summaries alone.” 5

What is empirical discourse analysis?

Researchers using empirical discourse analysis 4 do not use highly structured methods to code individual words and utterances in detail. Rather, they look for broad themes and functions of language in action using approaches called conversation analysis (the study of “talk-in-interaction”) 6 and genre analysis (the study of recurrent patterns, or genres of language that share similar structure and context—such as the case report, the scientific article). 7

Conversation analysis and genre analysis give more prominence to sociological uses of language than to grammatical or linguistic structures of words and sentences and are used to study human conversations or other forms of communication in order to elucidate the ways in which meaning and action are created by individuals producing the language. 4 Lingard and colleagues, for example, studied communication between nurses and surgeons during 128 hours of observing 35 different procedures in the operating room and categorised recurrent patterns of communication. They then used their findings to draw links between interpersonal tensions, the use of language, and the occurrence of errors in the operating room. 8 Genre analysis is presented in detail in box 1.

Box 1 An empirical discourse analysis (genre analysis) of case presentations by medical students*

This study took place at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Canada. It was conducted in the context of a medical student rotation in paediatrics. The aim of the study was to gain understanding of how the formal linguistic structure of the case presentation is used in academic medical settings.

The researchers conducted 21 in-depth interviews with medical students and faculty members. Pairs of researchers also observed 16 oral case presentations as well as the teaching exchanges that surrounded them. All of these encounters were tape recorded and transcribed (for a total of 555 pages of text); the transcriptions were iteratively analysed. The analysis was structured to allow themes to emerge from the data (that is, as indicated by multiple examples of such themes throughout the data). However, it particularly focused on themes that helped to illuminate the rules around certain modes of case presentation and on the role of these rules in teaching and learning.

The study showed a pronounced tension between the educational (“schooling”) uses and clinical (“workplace”) functions of case presentations. For example, students saw the case presentation as a school mode and emphasised that they wanted to get through their presentations without being asked any questions. Faculty, on the other hand, understood the case presentation as a way for professionals to jointly create shared knowledge. Their cross-purposes affected the effectiveness of faculty feedback to the students about their case presentations.

*Description based on study by Lingard et al 9

What is critical discourse analysis?

Researchers in cultural studies, sociology, and philosophy use the term critical discourse analysis to encompass an even wider sphere that includes all of the social practices, individuals, and institutions that make it possible or legitimate to understand phenomena in a particular way, and to make certain statements about what is “true.” Critical discourse analysis is particularly concerned with power and is rooted in “constructivism.” Thus the discourse analyses of Michel Foucault, for example, illustrated how particular discourses “systematically construct versions of the social world.” 4 Discourse analysis at this level involves not only the examination of text and the social uses of language but also the study of the ways in which the very existence of specific institutions and of roles for individuals to play are made possible by ways of thinking and speaking.

Foucault’s study of madness, for example, uncovered three distinct discourses that have constructed what madness is in different historical periods and in different places: madness as spiritual possession, madness as social deviancy, and madness as mental illness. 10 In a similarly oriented study, Speed showed how different discourses about mental health service in use today construct individuals’ identities as “patients,” “consumers,” or “survivors” and are made possible by specific institutional practices and ways for individuals to “be.” 11

In a different context, Stone contrasted the specific discourses used in the education literature for diabetes patients (“patient self care” and “autonomy”) with the medical literature’s use of doctor centred discourses (“compliance” and “adherence”). Stone related the resulting tension (and the important implications for patients’ behaviours) to the ways in which the roles that physicians and patients play are historically determined by different and conflicting models of what disease and healing are. 12

Finally, Shaw and colleagues used a discourse analysis to illustrate the many ways in which research itself can be defined (for example, by a lay person, a medical editor, the World Medical Association, a hospital, the taxman) and how these various definitions are linked to the power and objectives of particular institutions. 13

In these examples of critical discourse analysis, the language and practices of healthcare professionals and institutions are examined with the aim of understanding how these practices shape and limit the ways that individuals and institutions can think, speak, and conduct themselves. Table 2 ⇑ illustrates how a critical discourse approach to diabetes education would compare with discourse analyses using other linguistic and empirical approaches to research.

Although our categorisation (tables 1 ⇑ and 2 ⇑ ) emphasises the distinctions between these approaches to discourse analysis, in practice researchers often use more than one of the approaches together in a study. For example, genre analysts may invoke critical theorists in order to study the origins of the sanctioned methods of communication, asking, for example, “What historical and contextual factors led to the adoption of the scientific journal article as a legitimate form of expression of medical ‘truth’ rather than the adoption of another format?”

What should we be looking for in a discourse analysis?

Given the wide variety of approaches to discourse analysis, the elements that constitute a high quality study vary. Rogers has argued that some discourse analysis research suffers from scanty explanation of the analytical method used. 14 Thus one should expect clear documentation of the sources of information used and delimitation of data sources 3 (including a description of decisions made with regard to selection of groups or individuals for interviews, focus groups, or observation) and, importantly, a description of the context of the study. The method of analysis should be clearly explained, including assumptions made and methods used to code and synthesise data. Finally, given that the goal of critical discourse analysis is to illuminate and critique structures of power, it is especially important that researchers describe the ways in which their own individual sociocultural roles may influence their perspectives.

Discourse analysis is an effective method to approach a wide range of research questions in health care and the health professions. What underpins all variants of discourse analysis is the idea of examining segments, or frames of communication, and using this to understand meaning at a “meta” level, rather than simply at the level of actual semantic meaning. In this way, all of the various methods of discourse analysis provide rigorous and powerful approaches to understanding complex phenomena, ranging from the nature of on-the-ground human communication to the inner workings of systems of power that construct what is “true” about health and health care. While these methods are gaining popularity, much remains to be done to develop a widespread appreciation for the use, funding, and publication of discourse analyses. As a start, we hope this article will help readers who encounter these approaches to understand the basic premises of discourse analysis. Box 2 offers further reading for those interested in learning more or undertaking discourse analytical research.

Box 2 Further reading

Fairclough N. Language and power . London: Longman, 1989.

Foucault. The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language . New York: Random House, 1972.

Jaworski A, Coupland N, eds. The discourse reader . London: Routledge, 1999.

Kendall G, Wickham G. Using Foucault’s method . London: Sage, 2003.

Mills S. Discourse . London: Routledge, 2004.

Journal articles

Barnes R. Conversation analysis: a practical resource in the health care setting. Med Educ 2005;39:113-5.

Ford-Sumner S. Genre analysis: a means of learning more about the language of health care. Nurse Researcher 2006;14(1):7-17.

Roberts C, Sarangi S. Theme-oriented discourse analysis of medical encounters. Med Educ 2005;39:632-40.

Summary points

Discourse analysis is an effective method for approaching a wide range of research questions in health care and the health professions

Discourse analysis is about studying and analysing the uses of language

A vast array of data sources is available to the discourse analyst

The various methods of discourse analysis provide rigorous and powerful approaches to understanding complex phenomena, ranging from the nature of on-the-ground human communication to the inner workings of systems of power that construct what is “true” about health and health care

Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a879

Related to doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a288
doi: , 10.1136/bmj.39602.690162.47
doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a1020
doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a949
doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1035

This is the fourth in a series of six articles that aim to help readers to critically appraise the increasing number of qualitative research articles in clinical journals. The series editors are Ayelet Kuper and Scott Reeves.

For a definition of general terms relating to qualitative research, see the first article in this series.

Contributors: All authors contributed to the conception and drafting of the article and its revisions, and all approved the final version.

Competing interests: None declared.

Provenance and peer review: Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Harris ZS. Methods in structural linguistics . Chicago: University Press, 1951 .
Sacks H. Lectures on conversation . Jefferson G, ed. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995 .
↵ Foucault M. The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language . New York: Random House, 1972 .
↵ McHoul A, Grace W. A Foucault primer: discourse, power and the subject . New York: New York University Press, 1993 .
↵ Lacson RC, Barzilay R, Long WJ. Automatic analysis of medical dialogue in the home hemodialysis domain: structure induction and summarization. J Biomed Informatics 2006 ; 39 : 541 -55. OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science
↵ Ten Have P. Medical ethnomethodology: an overview. Human Studies 1995 ; 18 : 245 -261. OpenUrl CrossRef Web of Science
↵ Ford-Sumner S. Genre analysis: a means of learning more about the language of health care. Nurse Researcher 2006 ; 14 (1): 7 -17. OpenUrl PubMed
↵ Lingard L, Espin S, Whyte S, Regehr G, Baker GR, Reznick R, et al. Communication failures in the operating room: an observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Qual Saf Health Care 2004 ; 13 : 330 -4. OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text
↵ Lingard L, Schryer C, Garwood K, Spafford M. “Talking the talk”: school and workplace genre tensions in clerkship case presentations. Med Educ 2003 ; 37 : 612 -20. OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science
↵ Foucault M. Madness and civilization; a history of insanity in the age of reason [Howard R, translation]. New York: Vintage Books, 1988. (Original work published in 1961 .)
↵ Speed E. Patients, consumers and survivors: a case study of mental health service user discourses. Soc Sci Med 2006 ; 62 (1): 28 -38. OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science
↵ Stone MS. In search of patient agency in the rhetoric of diabetes care. Technical Communication Quarterly 1997 :6:201-17.
↵ Shaw S, Boynton PM, Greenhalgh T. Research governance: where did it come from, what does it mean? J R Soc Med 2005 ; 98 : 496 -502. OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text
↵ Rogers R, Malancharuvil-Berkes R, Mosley M, Hui D, O’Garro JG. Critical discourse analysis in education: a review of the literature. Rev Educ Res 2005 ; 75 : 365 -416. OpenUrl CrossRef

Discourse Analysis

Reference work entry
pp 1658–1660
Cite this reference work entry

Brendan K. O’Rourke 3

258 Accesses

Discourse studies

Discourse analysis is a name covering a large variety of approaches toward analyzing various texts or other systems of signs.

Description

Discourse analysis (DA) draws from a diverse range of intellectual sources including classical studies of rhetoric, post-structuralism, ethnomethodology , speech-act philosophy, social psychology, and linguistics. However, a central identifying feature of DA is that it concentrates on the way discourse acts on and creates our reality. In contrast, many non-DA approaches assume a reference theory of language where words or symbols are seen as labels for separately knowable objects or concepts and that if appropriately used, the words or symbols of language serve only as transparent descriptors of reality. There are a great variety of approaches within DA, and a useful way to break them down is to consider how they use the terms “discourse” and “analysis.” While such an approach can do some injustice to the way in...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Durable hardcover edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Antaki, C., & Rapley, M. (1996). “Quality of Life” talk: The liberal paradox of psychological testing. Discourse & Society, 7 (3), 293–316.

Google Scholar

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

Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

Fisher, W. R. (1985). The narrative paradigm: In the beginning. Journal of Communication, 35 (4), 74–89.

Foucault, M. (1966). The order of things . London: Routledge.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge . (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). London: Tavistock.

Foucault, M. (2006). History of madness (J. Murphy & J. Khalfa, Trans.). Abingdon: Routledge.

Gergen, K. (2001). Self-narration in social life. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: A reader (pp. 247–260). London: Sage.

Harré, R., & Gillet, G. (1994). The discursive mind . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (2000). Interaction and the standardized survey interview: The living questionnaire . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Koller, V. (2005). Critical discourse analysis and social cognition: Evidence from business media discourse. Discourse & Society, 16 (2), 199–224.

Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1999). Front pages: Analysis of newspaper layout. In A. Bell & P. Garret (Eds.), Approaches to media discourse (pp. 186–218). Oxford: Blackwell.

Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (W. Moore & P. Cammack, Trans.). London: Verso.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by . Chicago: University of Chicago.

McCann, E. J. (2004). ‘Best places’: Interurban competition, quality of life and popular media discourse. Urban Studies, 41 (10), 1909–1929.

Nilges, L. M. (2000). A nonverbal discourse analysis of gender in undergraduate educational gymnastics sequences using Laban effort analysis. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 19 (3), 287–310.

O’Rourke, B. K., & Pitt, M. (2007). Using the technology of the confessional as an analytical resource: Four analytical stances towards research interviews in discourse analysis (58 paragraphs). Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 8(2), Art. 3. Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/244

O’Toole, M. (2004). Opera ludentes: The Sydney Opera House at work and play. In K. O’Halloran (Ed.), Multimodal discourse analysis (pp. 11–27). London: Continuum.

Oswick, C., Keenoy, T., & Grant, D. (2002). Metaphor and analogical reasoning in organization theory: Beyond orthodoxy. Academy of Management Review, 27 (2), 294–303.

Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour . London: Sage.

Propp, V. (1984). Theory and history of folklore (A. Y. Martin & M. R. P., Trans.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Puchta, C., & Potter, J. (2004). Focus group practice . London: Sage.

Rapley, M. (2003). Quality of life research: A critical introduction . London: Sage.

Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation (Vol. I & II). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Schegloff, E. A. (1999). Discourse, pragmatics, conversation analysis. Discourse Studies, 1 (4), 405–435.

Tannen, D. (1984). Conversational style: Analyzing talk among friends . Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Yule, G. (2006). The study of language (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Marketing, Dublin Institute of Technology, DIT Aungier Street, 2, Dublin, Ireland

Brendan K. O’Rourke

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brendan K. O’Rourke .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada

Alex C. Michalos

(residence), Brandon, MB, Canada

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Cite this entry.

O’Rourke, B.K. (2014). Discourse Analysis. In: Michalos, A.C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_746

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_746

Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht

Print ISBN : 978-94-007-0752-8

Online ISBN : 978-94-007-0753-5

eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

How it works

Discourse Analysis – A Definitive Guide With Steps & Types

Published by Alvin Nicolas at August 14th, 2021 , Revised On August 29, 2023

What is Discourse Analysis?

Discourse analysis is an essential aspect of studying a language and its uses in day-to-day life.

It aims to gain in-depth knowledge about the language and identify its association with society, culture, and people’s perception.

It is used in various social science and humanities disciplines, such as linguistic, sociolinguistics, and psycholinguistics.

Aims of Discourse Analysis

It focuses on

The clear, in-depth meaning of the language.
The uses of language and its effects.
The association of the language with cultures, interpersonal relationships, and communication.
Various components of the language like vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, tone of voice, fonts, and written form.

Uses of Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is

Used to study the language and its applications in texts and contexts.
It focuses on the entire conversation and real text instead of constructed or artificial text.
It helps linguists to know the role of language in improving the understanding of people.
It enables teachers to learn many language strategies to teach students writing/speaking skills better.

Materials Used in Discourse Analysis

The material includes

Types of Discourse

What to analyse, does your research methodology have the following.

Great Research/Sources
Perfect Language
Accurate Sources

If not, we can help. Our panel of experts makes sure to keep the 3 pillars of Research Methodology strong.

Does your Research Methodology Have the Following

How to Conduct Discourse Analysis?

While conducting discourse analysis, you need to focus on the following points.

Purpose of the writer
The context of the speech/passage
Type of the language used.
The organisation of the text

You need to interpret the meaning and context of the discourse based on the available material and resources. There are various methods to conduct discourse analysis, but we are discussing the most basic method below.

Step1: Develop a Research Question

Like any other research in discourse analysis, it’s essential to have a research question to proceed with your study. After selecting your research question, you need to find out the relevant resources to find the answer to it. Discourse analysis can be applied to smaller or larger samples depending on your research’s aims and requirements.

Example : If you want to find out the impact of plagiarism on the credibility of the authors. You can examine the relevant materials available on the topic from the internet, newspapers, and books published during the past 5-10 years.

Step 2: Collect Information and Establish the Context

After formulating a research question, you can review the literature and find out the details about the source material, such as:

Who is the author?
What is the year and date of publication?
What’s the name of the publication?
What country and place is it from?
What language is used?
How and where did you find it?
How can others get access to the same source?
What kind of impact did it make on its audience?
What’s the association between discourse material and real life?

These questions enable you to construct a strong evidence-based theory about your study.

Example: While investigating the history and origin of a particular religion. You also have to research the political events, culture, language of the people, and their association with society.

Generally, details about the publication and production of the material are available in the about section on their online websites. If you don’t find the relevant information online, don’t hesitate to contact the editor or publication via email, phone calls, etc.

Step 3: Analyse the Content

In this step, you should analyse various aspects of the materials such as:

Sentence structure
Inter-relationship between the text
Layout and Page quality (if you are using offline materials)
Links, comments, technical excellence, readability, multimedia content (if you are using online material)
The genre of the source (a news item, political speech, a report, interview, biography, commentary, etc.)

The analysis of these elements gives you a clear understanding, and you can present your findings more accurately. Once you have analysed the above features, you should analyse the following aspects:

The structure of the argument
The role of the introduction and conclusion of the material
The context of the material
Patterns and themes
Discursive statements (arguments, perspective, thoughts of the writer/speaker
Grammatical features (use of pronouns, adjectives, phrases, active or passive voice, and their meaning)
Literary figures (idioms, similes, metaphors, allegories, proverbs)

Step 4: Interpret the Data

Now you have all the information, but the question that arises here is:

What does it all mean?

To answer this question, compile all your findings to explain the meaning and context of the discourse.

Step 5: Present your Findings

It’s time to present your results. Throughout the process, you gathered detailed notes of the discourse, building a strong presentation or thesis. You can use the references of other relevant sources as evidence to support your discussion. Always try to make your paper interesting to grab the attention of the reader.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Discourse Analysis

It provides a way of thinking and analysing the problem.
It enables us to understand the context and perception of the speaker.
It can be applied at any given time, place, and people.
It helps to learn any language its origin and association with society and culture.

Disadvantages

There are many options available as each tradition has its own concepts, procedures, and a specific understanding of discourse and its analysis.
Discourse analysis doesn’t help to find out the answer to scientific problems.

Frequently Asked Questions

How to describe the discourse analysis.

Discourse analysis examines language use in context. It studies how communication shapes and reflects social meaning, power dynamics, and cultural norms. By analyzing spoken, written, or visual language, it unveils hidden ideologies, identities, and social structures within various contexts.

Discourse analysis: A useful methodology for health-care system researches

Ahmadreza yazdannik.

Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Nursing and Midwifery Faculty, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Alireza Yousefy

1 Department of Medical Education, Medical Education Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Sepideh Mohammadi

2 Department of Nursing and Midwifery Ramsar, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Ramsar, I.R Iran

Discourse analysis (DA) is an interdisciplinary field of inquiry and becoming an increasingly popular research strategy for researchers in various disciplines which has been little employed by health-care researchers. The methodology involves a focus on the sociocultural and political context in which text and talk occur. DA adds a linguistic approach to an understanding of the relationship between language and ideology, exploring the way in which theories of reality and relations of power are encoded in such aspects as the syntax, style, and rhetorical devices used in texts. DA is a useful and productive qualitative methodology but has been underutilized within health-care system research. Without a clear understanding of discourse theory and DA it is difficult to comprehend important research findings and impossible to use DA as a research strategy. To redress this deficiency, in this article, represents an introduction to concepts of discourse and DA, DA history, Philosophical background, DA types and analysis strategy. Finally, we discuss how affect to the ideological dimension of such phenomena discourse in health-care system, health beliefs and intra-disciplinary relationship in health-care system.

Introduction

For at least then years now, “discourse” and “discourse analysis (DA)” has been the fashionable term. Usually, in scientific research and debates, it is used indiscriminately, without being defined. Without a clear understanding of discourse theory and DA, it is difficult to comprehend important research findings and impossible to use DA as a research strategy. Hence, this paper aims to help health-care practitioner employ DA as an effective research strategy.

Materials and Methods

This study was a narrative review. Electronic databases such as PubMed, Medline, ProQuest, and science direct were searched using the keywords discourse analysis, methodology, and health-care system. A manual search of various journals and books was also carried out. Not only all the searched articles and books were included, but also highly relevant articles from English literature were considered for the present review.

Discourse analysis description

There are many explanations and definitions of discourse and DA.[ 1 ] Discourse has been defined as “a group of ideas or patterned way of thinking which can be identified in textual and verbal communications, and can also be located in wider social structures.”[ 2 ] In other definition “discourse is a belief, practice or knowledge that constructs reality and provides a shared way of understanding the world.” In a broad sense, discourses are defined as systems of meaning that are related to the interactional and wider sociocultural context and operate regardless of the speakers’ intentions. DA is a broad and diverse field, including a variety of approaches to the study of language, which derive from different scientific disciplines and utilize various analytical. DA examines language in use.[ 3 ] As suggested, by Fairclough, “discourse is the use of language as a form of social practice and DA is an analysis of how texts work within the sociocultural practice.”[ 4 ] DA focuses on the ways that language and symbols shape interpretations of negotiators’ identities, instrumental activity, and relationships.[ 5 ]

Discourse analysis history background

DA is both an old and a new discipline. Historically, DA path a way from linguistic approaches to socialistic approaches. Its origins can be traced back to the study of language, public speech, and literature more than 2000 years ago. One major historical source is undoubtedly classical rhetoric, the art of good speaking. Whereas the grammatica, the historical antecedent of linguistics, was concerned with the normative rules of correct language use, its sister discipline of rhetorical dealt with the precepts for the planning, organization, specific operations, and performance of public speech in political and legal settings.[ 6 ] The term of DA first came into general use following the publication of a series of papers by ZelligHarris beginning in 1952 and reporting on work from which he developed transformational grammar in the late 1930s.[ 7 ] DA in this decade concerned with such microelements of discourse as the use of grammar, rhetorical devices, syntax, sound forms and the overt meaning and content matter of words and sentences of a text or talk, and such macro structures as topics and themes. After two decades, a new form of DA emerged in the middle decades of the 60s and 70s, following the development of knowledge in the social sciences and humanities. Formal sentence grammars had been challenged from several sides and were at least complemented with new ideas about language use, linguistic variation, speech acts, conversation, other dialogs, text structures, communicative events, and their cognitive and social contexts. Much formal rigor and theoretical sophistication had to be temporarily bracketed out to formulate completely new approaches.[ 6 ]

A new cross-discipline of DA began to develop in most of the humanities and social sciences concurrently with and related to, other disciplines, such as anthropology, semiology, psycholinguistic, sociolinguistics, and pragmatics. Many of these approaches, especially those influenced by the social sciences, favor a more dynamic study of oral talk-in-interaction. In this view, DA concerned with how an individual's experience is socially and historically constructed by language and DA assumes that language constructs how we think about and experience ourselves and our relationships with others.[ 6 ] In Europe, Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida became the key theorists of the subject, especially of discourse. In this context, the term “discourse” no longer refers to formal linguistic aspects, but to institutionalized patterns of knowledge that become manifest in disciplinary structures and operate by the connection of knowledge, community and power. Since the 1970s, Foucault's works have had an increasing impact, especially on DA in the social sciences. Now DA as qualitative methods apply in various fields such as anthropology, ethnography, sociology, intellect, cognitive and social psychology, politic science, communication, and critical linguistics, and health-care system.

Philosophical background

Mainly DA philosophical base is a social constructionist approach.[ 8 ] Social constructionism is an umbrella term for a range of new theories about culture and society.[ 9 ] DA is just one among several social constructionist approaches, but it is one of the most widely used approaches within social constructionism.[ 10 ]

Discourse analytical approaches take as their starting point the claim of structuralist and poststructuralist linguistic philosophy, which our access to reality is always through language. With language, we create representations of reality that are never mere reflections of a preexisting reality but contribute to constructing reality. That does not mean that reality itself does not exist. Meanings and representations are real. Physical objects also exist, but they only gain meaning through discourse. Language, then, is not merely a channel through which information about underlying mental states and behavior or facts about the world are communicated. On the contrary, language is a “machine” that generates, and as a result constitutes the social world. This also extends to the constitution of social identities and social relations. It means that changes in discourse are a means by which the social world is changed.[ 9 ] In other words “individuals are not intentional agents of their own words, creatively and privately converting thoughts to sounds or inscriptions. Rather they gain their status as selves by taking a position within a preexisting form of language.”[ 11 ]

In terms of epistemology, many discourse theorists adopt a relativist view; they assume that there exist no objective grounds on which the truth of claims can be proven and propose that the value of knowledge should be evaluated according to other criteria, such as its applicability, usefulness and clarity.[ 12 ] Others, however, claim that relativism does not allow for a position from which social critique and action can be developed and adopt a critical realist position; they acknowledge that knowledge is always mediated by social processes but propose that underlying enduring structures do exist and that these can be known through their effects.[ 8 ]

Burr provided an outline of the general philosophical assumptions that underpin most discourse analytical approaches, drawing on the accounts of social constructionism.

They are as follows:

A critical approach to taken-for-granted knowledge - Our knowledge of the world should not be treated as objective truth. Reality is only accessible to us through categories, so our knowledge and representations of the world are not reflections of the reality “out there,” but rather are products of our ways of categorizing the world, or, in discursive analytical terms, products of discourse[ 10 ]
Historical and cultural specificity; We are fundamentally historical and cultural beings and our views of, and knowledge about, the world are the products of historically situated interchanges among people.[ 13 ] Consequently, the ways in which we understand and represent the world are historically and culturally specific and contingent: our worldviews and our identities could have been different, and they can change over time. This view match by this view that all knowledge is contingent is an anti-foundationalism and anti-essentialist[ 9 ]
The link between knowledge and social processes – Our ways of understanding the world are created and maintained by social processes.[ 10 , 13 ] Knowledge is created through social interaction in which we construct common truths and compete about what is true and false.[ 9 ]

The link between knowledge and social action - Within a particular worldview, some forms of action become natural, others unthinkable. Different social understandings of the world lead to different social actions, and therefore, the social construction of knowledge and truth has social consequences.[ 10 , 13 ]

Discourse analysis approaches

DA is not only one approach but also a series of interdisciplinary approaches that have been applied in varying ways, from purely linguistic research into a conversation on a “micro” level to the broadly historic philosophical, and societal context.[ 2 ] DA Different perspectives offer their own suggestions and to some extent, compete to appropriate the terms “discourse” and “DA” for their own definitions.[ 9 ] One major difference between the various types of DA is in their methods of analysis.[ 14 ]

DA is composed of two main dimensions, textual, and contextual. Textual dimensions are those which account for the structure of discourses, while contextual dimensions relate these structural descriptions to various properties of the social, political, or cultural context in which they take place.[ 6 ] The DA that is rooted in linguistics and in textual form is concerned with such microelements of discourse as the use of grammar, rhetorical devices, syntax, sound forms and the overt meaning and content matter of words and sentences of a text or talk, and such macro-structures as topics and themes. The contextual form examines the production and reception processes of discourse, with particular attention to the reproduction of ideology and hegemony in such processes, and the links between discourse structures and social interaction and situations.[ 2 , 6 ]

Some DA mixes one or more of these approaches; for example, one kind of critical DA (CDA) combines linguistic analysis and ideological critique.[ 4 ]

There are various categorizations of discourse analytical research.[ 15 ] Phillips describes four main styles of discourse analytical research [ Figure 1 ]. The styles are categorized along two axes: (1) between text and context, and (2) between constructivist and critical approaches.[ 16 ]

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is JEHP-6-111-g001.jpg

Four perspectives of discourse analysis

The first axis is about the degree to which research focuses on individual texts or on the surrounding texts.[ 15 ] Phillips distinguishes between a proximal and a distal context. The proximal context is the local context, for example, a discipline or science. The distal context is a broader social context, for example ecological, regional, or cultural settings.[ 16 ]

The second axis describes the degree to which the research focuses on ideology and power, as opposed to processes of social construction. The axes are seen as continua, not as dichotomies. Thus, combinations of elements of both axes are possible and usual.[ 16 ]

Jansen in his article summarized the four perspectives of DA that described by Phillips; they are as follows.

Social linguistic analysis

A social linguistic analysis is constructivist and focuses on individual texts. It gives insight into the organization and construction of these texts and how they work to construct and organize other phenomena. The focus is not on the exploration of the power dynamics in which the texts are implicated.

Interpretive structuralism

Similar to social linguistic analysis, these discourse analyses are interested in the way in which broader discursive contexts come into being. They are not directly concerned with power. Individual texts are more important as background material.

Critical linguistic analysis

Critical linguistic analysis shares with social linguistic analysis its focus on individual texts, but its main concern is with the dynamics of power that surround the text. The examination of individual texts is for understanding how the structures of domination of the proximal context are implicated in the text.

Critical discourse analysis

The main interest of CDA is in the discursive activity to construct and maintain unequal power relations. The distal context is of interest, that is, the ecological, cultural, or regional setting that surrounds individual texts.[ 15 , 16 ] The CDA process derived from the work of Fairclough and is a study of language as a social and cultural practice. It is based on the premise that texts have a constructive effect in shaping how we experience ourselves and others and how we act in relation to this, example, the ability to prescribe medication.[ 4 ]

In addition to the above DA types, there are other classifications for DA theoretical approaches.

Discursive psychology

Discursive psychology is part of the general movement of critical psychology, which has been reacting against mainstream social psychology, especially the sort of experimental psychology.[ 17 ] The aim of discursive psychologists is not so much to analyze the changes in society's “large-scale discourses,” which concrete language use can bring about, as to investigate how people use the available discourses flexibly in creating and negotiating representations of the world and identities in talk-in-interaction and to analyze the social consequences of this. Despite the choice of label for this approach “discursive psychology” its main focus is not internal psychological conditions. Discursive psychology is an approach to social psychology that has developed a type of DA to explore the ways in which people's selves, thoughts, and emotions are formed and transformed through social interaction and to cast light on the role of these processes in social and cultural reproduction and change.[ 9 ]

Historical discourse analysis

Historical DA is a poststructuralist approach to reading and writing history; a mode of conceptualizing history through a theorized lens of critique. Historical DA works against the objectivist fallacy of traditional positivist historical methods in decentering the authority of the historian as a neutral recorder of facts and the claim of historical writings as objective reconstructions of past events. In line with its intent to disrupt taken for granted ways of conceptualizing history, the task of historical DA is not to find truths about past events or to identify the origins or causes of past events, but to expose history as a genre contingent, ambiguous, and interpretive. Historical DA is, therefore, less a set methodology than a set of postmethodological methodologies.[ 18 ]

Foucaultian discourse analysis

Today the theoretical work of Michel Foucault is widely considered as being part of the theoretical body of social sciences such as sociology, social history, political sciences, and social psychology.[ 19 ] Discourse, as defined by Foucault, refers to: ways of constituting knowledge, together with the social practices, forms of subjectivity, and power relations which inhere in such knowledge's and relations between them. Discourses are more than ways of thinking and producing meaning. They constitute the “nature” of the body, unconscious and conscious mind and emotional life of the subjects they seek to govern.[ 20 ] Foucault's focus is on questions of how some discourses have shaped and created meaning systems that have gained the status and currency of “truth,” and dominate how we define and organize both ourselves and our social world while other alternative discourses are marginalized and subjugated, yet potentially “offer” sites where hegemonic practices can be contested, challenged, and “resisted”. In Foucault's view, social context in which certain knowledge's and practices emerged as permissible and desirable or changed. In his view knowledge is inextricably connected to power. Power has an important role in Foucault's view, and power is a process that operates in continuous struggles and confrontations that change, strengthen, or reverse the polarity of the force relations between power and resistance. This means that power is described as a relational process that is embodied in context-specific situations and is partially identifiable through its ideological effects on the lives of people. Power is productive of truth, rights, and the conceptualization of individuals, through the processes, or discursive practices of the human sciences and other major discourses such as social sciences, bureaucracy, medicine, law, and education.[ 21 ] Discourse analysts in this way need to be aware of the conceptualizations of power and resistance to be able to recognize them within a discourse. Emancipatory of the marginalized group is an important goal of recognizing power in Foucault's approach.

Analytical strategies

The concrete representation of discourses is texts or discursive “units.” They make have a variety of forms: formal written records, such as news information, company statements and reports, academic papers; spoken words, pictures, symbols, artifacts, transcripts of social interactions such as conversations, focus group discussions, and individual interviews; or involve media such as TV programs, advertisements, magazines, novels, etc. In fact, texts are depositories of discourses, they “store” complex social meanings produced in a particular historical situation that involved individual producer of a text unit, and social surrounds that is appealed to the play.[ 1 ] If we are to understand discourse, we should also understand the context, in which they arise.[ 6 ] Researchers usually distinguish two types of context: broad and local. There is also a more detailed classification of the degree of a context, involved in a study: micro-discourse (specific study of language), meso-discourse (still study of a language but with a broader perspective), grand discourse (study of a system of discourses that are integrated in a particular theme such as culture), and mega discourse (referring to a certain phenomenon like globalization).[ 22 ]

DA is a process rather than a step-by-step research method and can be employed within different epistemological paradigms.[ 23 ] Crowe described the most important questions in data analysis; how it is structured as particular type of text; what politeness strategies are used; how subject positions are constructed; the types and functions of the language used and the identification of keywords; the thematic structure; how social relations are constructed; and how reality is represented.

The content of discourses can be investigated using many different tools. In a specific analysis, it may be a problem where to begin and which tools to select. In this section, we will present four strategies expressed by Jørgensen and Phillips which can be used across all the approaches to provide an overall understanding of the material and identify analytical focus points for further investigation.

The simplest way of building an impression of the nature of a text is to compare it with other texts. The strategy of comparison is based theoretically on the structuralist point that a statement always gains its meaning through being different from something else which has been said or could have been said. In applying this strategy, the researcher asks the following questions: In what ways is the text under study different from other texts and what are the consequences? Which understanding of the world is taken for granted and which understandings are not recognized?

Substitution

Substitution is a form of comparison in which the analyst herself creates the text for comparison. Substitution involves substituting a word with a different word, resulting in two versions of the text which can be compared with one another; in this way, the meaning of the original word can be pinned down. Through such comparisons, a picture can gradually be formed of how the text establishes her identity in relation to the world around her including the decisions she constructs as within her control and the ones that she constructs as out with her control. In common with the strategy of comparison, substitution draws on the structuralist point that words acquire their meaning by being different from other words. In the case of a long text, a single word can be substituted throughout the text to see how it changes the meaning of the text as a whole. However, textual aspects other than single words can also be subject to substitution.

Exaggeration of detail

The exaggeration of detail involves blowing up a particular textual detail out of proportion. The analyst may have identified a textual feature which appears odd or significant, but, as it is just one isolated feature, does not know what its significance is or how it relates to the text as a whole. To explore the significance of the feature, one can overexaggerate it, and then ask what conditions would be necessary in order for the feature to make sense and into what overall interpretation of the text the feature would fit.

Multivocality

The strategy of multivocality consists of the delineation of different voices or discursive logics in the text. The strategy is based on the discourse analytical premise concerning intertextuality– that is, the premise that all utterances inevitably draw on, incorporate or challenge earlier utterances. The aim of the strategy is to use the multivocality to generate new questions to pose to the text: what characterizes the different voices of the text? When does each voice speak? What meanings do the different voices contribute to producing?

Validation and rigor

DA is a highly interpretative process that acknowledges that multiple interpretations can emerge from the data.[ 4 ] DA is an interpretative process that can result in different researchers examining the same data yet arriving at different findings. The reliability and validity of findings, therefore, rely on the strength and logic of the researcher's argument in reports and presentations pertaining to study findings.[ 6 ] Crowe offers several key questions to consider when establishing rigor in DA studies:

Methodological rigor

Does the research question “fit” the DA
Do the texts under analysis “fit” the research question
Have sufficient resources, including historical, political, and clinical resources, been sampled
Has the interpretative paradigm been described clearly
Are the data-gathering and analysis congruent with the interpretative paradigm
Is there a detailed description of the data gathering and analytic processes
Is the description of the methods detailed enough to enable readers to follow and understand context?

Interpretative rigor

Have the linkages between the discourse and findings been adequately described
Is there inclusion of verbatim text to support the findings
Are the linkages between the discourse and the interpretation plausible
Have these linkages been described and supported adequately
How are these findings related to existing knowledge in the subject?

DA application in health-care system

The nature of the knowledge fundamental to health care and the power it wields during its practice, is of continuing interest to philosophers, social scientists and anthropologists, as well as to those individuals who directly use it in administering health care, namely, doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals. The development of sociopolitical critique has centered on the nature of the foundations of knowledge and how this influences our present understanding of the human condition. With the advent of the modern world, there have been continuing controversies about the essential characteristics of rationality.[ 21 ]

In Foucault's view, social context in which certain knowledge's and practices emerged as permissible and desirable or changed. In his view knowledge is inextricably connected to power. Power has an important role in Foucault's view, and power is a process that operates in continuous struggles and confrontations that change, strengthen, or reverse the polarity of the force relations between power and resistance. This means that power is described as a relational process that is embodied in context-specific situations and is partially identifiable through its ideological effects on the lives of people. Power is productive of truth, rights, and the conceptualization of individuals, through the processes, or discursive practices of the human sciences and other major discourses such as social sciences, bureaucracy, medicine, law, and education.[ 22 , 24 ]

DA has the potential to reveal valuable insights into the social and political contexts in which varied discourses about health take place. Areas of research which are relevant to healthcare concerns include the discourses of: the interpersonal communication processes between doctors or nurse and patients, interprofessional conversation, in-depth interviews about lay health beliefs, conversations between lay people about health risks and issues, government-sponsored health promotion messages, health information in the mass entertainment and news media, service protocols, information/education pamphlets for patients; texts describing particular understandings of health and illness or clinical approaches to treatment medical and health-care journals and official texts, textbooks in health-care specialties, health care's system communication about such disease, paternalistic manners in health-care system.

Human is one of the most important concepts in health-care system. Crowe believes that “Individuals can be considered as particular individuals, The meaning and value preexists the identification of these characteristics in an individual, and thus language does not reflect an external reality but expresses cultural conventions.”[ 20 ] Hence, we can say emancipatory of the oppressed group, marginalized patient (cause of race, ethnicity or disease types, such as HIV patient) and giving the voice is the one of the most important uses of DA in health care system.

In this part of article to learn more about the DA application in health care system, we expressed summary an article in this area.

DA as a qualitative approach has an important role in health-care system because health-care system needs to be knowledgeable across the multiple paradigms and perspectives that inform an understanding of the biological, psychological, social, cultural, ethical, and political dimensions of human lives.”[ 25 ] Practice in this area is a political, cultural, and social practice and needs to be understood as such to improve the quality of care provided. Effective clinical reasoning relies on employing several different kinds of knowledge and research[ 26 ] that draw on different perspectives, methodologies, and techniques to generate the breadth of knowledge and depth of understanding of clinical practices and patients’ experiences of those practices. DA can make a contribution to the development of this knowledge.

Financial support and sponsorship

This study was financially supported by Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

🆕 Interactive Articles

Methods and Approaches of Discourse Analysis

by Discourse Analyzer
March 31, 2024 May 3, 2024

Are you ready to enhance your learning by asking the assistant?

Alternatively, if you don't have an account yet

“Methods and Approaches of Discourse Analysis” article serves as a gateway for readers interested in the complex ways that language influences and reflects social structures. The article details various analytical frameworks and methodologies used in Discourse Analysis (DA), ranging from Content Analysis and Conversation Analysis to more critical perspectives like Foucauldian Discourse Analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis . Each approach is carefully outlined to show how it contributes to understanding language in texts and social interactions, whether through quantitative measurement of language features or qualitative interpretations of textual meanings. Additionally, the article addresses the significance of methodological diversity in DA, including mixed methods approaches that combine qualitative depth with quantitative breadth, offering a richer, more comprehensive understanding of discourse. This introductory guide not only equips readers with the knowledge of different DA methods but also emphasizes the importance of rigorous data collection, ethical considerations, and the thoughtful analysis necessary to explore the powerful role of language in shaping human experience and social order.

1) Content Analysis

2) conversation analysis (ca), 3) critical discourse analysis (cda), 4) ethnography of communication, 5) foucauldian discourse analysis, 6) narrative analysis, 7) multimodal discourse analysis, 8) corpus linguistics, 1) qualitative approaches, 2) quantitative approaches, 3) differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches, 4) mixed methods in da, 1) data collection and analysis, 2) coding and categorizing data, 3) ethical considerations, frequently asked questions, 1. analytical frameworks.

Discourse Analysis (DA) encompasses a variety of methods and approaches for examining language use across texts, talks, and social practices. These methods vary widely depending on the theoretical perspective and the specific objectives of the research. Below are some key methods and approaches used in Discourse Analysis:

This method involves systematically categorizing the content of texts (which could be written texts, speech, or other forms of communication) to quantify certain aspects, such as the frequency of certain words, phrases, themes, or concepts. Content analysis can be both qualitative and quantitative and is useful for analyzing large volumes of text to identify patterns or trends.

CA is a methodological approach that focuses on the detailed, systematic study of the talk in interaction. It examines the sequential organization of speech to understand how participants in a conversation manage turn-taking, repair, openings, closings, and how they achieve mutual understanding. CA is particularly interested in the procedural aspects of conversation and how social actions are accomplished through talk.

CDA is an approach that aims to understand the relationship between discourse and social power. It analyzes how discourse structures (such as texts, talks, or visual images) serve to establish, maintain, or challenge power relations within society. CDA pays close attention to the ways in which language is used to represent different social groups and interests, often focusing on issues of ideology, identity, and hegemony.

This approach combines ethnographic methods with the analysis of discourse, focusing on the ways in which language use is embedded within cultural contexts. Researchers adopting this method study communication practices within their socio-cultural settings to understand the norms, values, and expectations that govern how language is used in specific communities.

Inspired by the work of Michel Foucault, this approach examines how discourses construct subjects, objects, and knowledge within specific historical and social contexts. It is concerned with the rules and practices that produce discourses, how discourses are related to power and knowledge, and the effects they have on society and individual subjects.

Narrative analysis focuses on the ways in which people use stories to make sense of their experiences and the world around them. This method examines the structure, content, and function of narratives to understand how individuals construct identities and social realities through storytelling.

With the recognition that communication is not only verbal but also involves other modes (such as visual, audio, gestural), multimodal discourse analysis studies how these different modes interact and contribute to the meaning-making process. It is particularly relevant in the analysis of digital media, advertising, and other forms of communication that use multiple semiotic resources.

While not exclusively a method of discourse analysis, corpus linguistics involves analyzing large collections of texts (corpora) using computational tools to identify patterns, frequencies, collocations, and other linguistic features. This method can support discourse analysis by providing empirical evidence of language use across different contexts.

Each of these methods and approaches brings a unique perspective to the study of discourse, allowing researchers to explore the complex ways in which language shapes and is shaped by social reality. The choice of method often depends on the research questions, the data available, and the theoretical framework guiding the analysis.

2. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches

Discourse Analysis (DA) can be approached through qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods, depending on the research objectives, the nature of the data, and the theoretical framework adopted. Understanding these different approaches and how they can be integrated provides a comprehensive toolkit for researchers in the field.

Qualitative approaches to DA focus on the interpretation of textual or spoken data to understand the underlying meanings, themes, and patterns within a discourse. This method is less about counting occurrences and more about understanding the context, the social practices, and the power relations that discourse reflects and constructs. Qualitative DA is deeply concerned with the nuances of language use, such as metaphors, narrative structures, and the ways in which language constructs identities and social realities.

Applications: Qualitative DA is often used in studies where the goal is to explore the complexities of discourse in shaping social phenomena, such as identity formation, social inequality, or cultural practices. Methods like Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Conversation Analysis (CA) typically adopt a qualitative approach.

Quantitative approaches to DA involve the systematic coding and counting of features within texts or spoken language to identify patterns, frequencies, and correlations. This method relies on statistical analysis to draw conclusions about the data, offering a more objective measurement of discourse patterns.

Applications: Quantitative DA is suitable for studies aiming to generalize findings from a larger corpus of text or speech. It can be used to track changes in discourse over time, compare discourse across different groups, or measure the prevalence of certain linguistic features. Content analysis and corpus linguistics are examples of methods that can be applied quantitatively.

Objective vs. Subjective: Quantitative DA is often viewed as more objective, relying on statistical methods to analyze data, while qualitative DA is more subjective, focusing on the interpretation of texts and contexts.
Data Representation: Quantitative methods result in numerical data, graphs, and tables, whereas qualitative methods produce detailed descriptions, themes, and narrative accounts.
Focus: Quantitative DA tends to focus on the frequency and distribution of certain elements within discourse, whereas qualitative DA focuses on the content, meaning, and context of discourse.
Scope: Quantitative approaches can handle large volumes of data, making them suitable for broad analyses. Qualitative approaches, while potentially more time-consuming, provide deep insights into smaller datasets.

Mixed methods involve the combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches in the analysis of discourse. This integration allows for a more comprehensive understanding of discourse by leveraging the strengths of both methodologies.

Applications: Mixed methods can be particularly useful when researchers seek to explore a complex research question that requires both an in-depth understanding of contextual meanings (qualitative) and the generalizability or measurement of certain features across a larger dataset (quantitative). For example, a mixed-methods study might first use qualitative methods to explore the themes and narratives within a set of interviews and then apply quantitative methods to measure how frequently certain themes appear across a broader range of texts.

Advantages: Mixed methods in DA offer a robust framework for research, allowing researchers to validate findings through triangulation, enrich the analysis by combining insights from different methodological perspectives, and provide a more nuanced understanding of the phenomena under study.

In summary, the choice between qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods in Discourse Analysis depends on the research questions, the nature of the data, and the goals of the study. Each approach offers unique insights and has its place in the comprehensive study of discourse.

3. Data Collection and Analysis

Discourse Analysis (DA) involves a meticulous process of data collection and analysis, with careful consideration of the types of texts or corpora selected, the methodologies employed for coding and categorizing data, and adherence to ethical standards. Here’s an overview:

In DA, data can comprise a wide variety of texts, including written documents (books, articles, social media posts), spoken language (interviews, conversations, speeches), or multimodal texts (videos, images with captions). The choice of data depends on the research question and the theoretical framework guiding the analysis.

Selecting Texts and Corpora The selection of texts or corpora is a critical step in DA. Researchers must choose texts that are representative of the discourse being studied, considering factors such as genre, context, and the social practices they reflect. For instance, a study on political discourse might analyze speeches and social media posts of political figures, while research on medical discourse might examine patient-doctor conversations and medical textbooks. It’s essential to justify the selection of texts to ensure the study’s relevance and reliability.

Analyzing the Data Analysis in DA varies widely across different approaches but generally involves closely reading and interpreting the text to uncover patterns, themes, meanings, and structures. This might involve identifying discourse strategies, narrative structures, rhetorical devices, or specific uses of language that reveal underlying ideologies, power relations, or social identities.

Coding involves systematically labeling segments of the text to identify specific features or themes. This can be done manually or with the help of software. Coding can be inductive, emerging from the data itself, or deductive, based on pre-existing theoretical frameworks.

Categorizing involves grouping coded segments into broader categories that reflect major themes, concepts, or discourse strategies identified in the analysis. This process helps in structuring the analysis and facilitating the interpretation of how language functions within the texts.

Ethical considerations in DA are paramount, especially when dealing with sensitive topics or personal data. Key ethical concerns include:

Consent: Ensuring that participants in studies involving spoken discourse or private texts have given informed consent for their data to be used in research.
Anonymity and Confidentiality: Protecting the identity of participants by anonymizing data and maintaining confidentiality, especially when dealing with sensitive information.
Impact: Considering the potential impact of the research on participants and communities, including avoiding harm and misrepresentation.
Bias and Reflexivity: Researchers should be aware of their own biases and the power dynamics in the research process, striving for reflexivity in how their perspectives and choices may influence the analysis.

Overall, DA requires a thoughtful and rigorous approach to data collection, analysis, coding, and ethical practices. These steps ensure that the research is robust, reliable, and respectful of the communities and discourses it aims to understand.

In conclusion, the analytical frameworks of Discourse Analysis (DA) present a rich tapestry of methodologies that enable researchers to delve into the complexities of language and its role in shaping social phenomena. From qualitative approaches that unveil nuanced meanings embedded within discourse to quantitative methods that uncover patterns and frequencies, each framework contributes to a comprehensive understanding of language use. Moreover, the integration of mixed methods offers a holistic approach, bridging the qualitative-depth and quantitative-breadth to provide multifaceted insights into discourse analysis. As researchers navigate the terrain of data collection, analysis, and ethical considerations, they engage in a rigorous process that not only illuminates the mechanisms of discourse but also upholds principles of integrity and respect. Ultimately, these analytical frameworks serve as invaluable tools for unraveling the multifaceted nature of language and its profound impact on society, paving the way for deeper insights and transformative understanding.

DA is a field that examines language use across texts, talks, and social practices to uncover how language shapes and is shaped by social reality. It incorporates various methods and approaches, influenced by theoretical perspectives and research objectives.

Key methods include Content Analysis, Conversation Analysis, Critical Discourse Analysis, Ethnography of Communication, Foucauldian Discourse Analysis, Narrative Analysis, Multimodal Discourse Analysis, and Corpus Linguistics. Each method offers a unique lens for analyzing discourse.

Content Analysis systematically categorizes text content to quantify aspects like word frequencies, themes, or concepts. It can be qualitative or quantitative and is ideal for analyzing large volumes of text to identify patterns.

CA focuses on the detailed study of talk in interaction, examining how participants manage conversation through turn-taking, repair, and achieving mutual understanding. It emphasizes the procedural aspects of conversation and social action accomplishment.

CDA aims to understand the relationship between discourse and social power, analyzing discourse structures to see how they establish, maintain, or challenge power relations. It explores language use in representing social groups and focuses on ideology, identity, and hegemony.

This approach merges ethnographic methods with discourse analysis, studying how language use is embedded in cultural contexts. It aims to understand the norms, values, and expectations governing language use in specific communities.

Inspired by Michel Foucault, this approach examines how discourses construct subjects, objects, and knowledge within historical and social contexts. It focuses on discourse production rules, power-knowledge relations, and societal effects.

Narrative Analysis studies how people use stories to construct identities and realities, examining narrative structure, content, and function to understand storytelling’s role in experience interpretation.

Recognizing that communication involves various modes (visual, audio, gestural), this analysis studies how different modes interact and contribute to meaning-making, especially in digital media and advertising.

Although not exclusively for DA, Corpus Linguistics analyzes large text collections using computational tools to identify linguistic patterns, frequencies, and features, providing empirical language use evidence across contexts.

Qualitative approaches focus on interpreting textual or spoken data to understand underlying meanings and contexts. In contrast, quantitative approaches involve systematic coding and counting of text features to identify patterns and correlations. Mixed methods combine both to offer a comprehensive discourse understanding.

Ethical considerations include obtaining informed consent, ensuring anonymity and confidentiality, considering research impact, and being reflexive about biases and power dynamics in the research process.

Open Collections

Ubc theses and dissertations, do we dare disturb the status quo : a critical discourse analysis of casel’s social and emotional learning (sel) framework gupta, adishi --> -->.

This thesis engages in a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) framework to uncover and critique the underlying discourses that shape and are shaped by Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) practices. Despite SEL's recognition for fostering personal and collective growth within educational settings, this research identifies a critical gap between SEL's stated aspirations and underlying implications, particularly in the context of societal structures and power dynamics. Drawing on Fairclough's three-dimensional model of CDA, this analysis delves into the linguistic, practice-oriented, and sociocultural dimensions of the CASEL framework, revealing a discourse that, while aimed at promoting empathy, self-awareness, and responsible decision-making, aligns with neoliberal ideals, pathologizing and policing nonconformity while silencing diverse socio-cultural realities. This thesis argues that SEL, as currently conceptualized and implemented within the framework of CASEL, risks reinforcing existing social inequities by promoting compliance and endorsing the status quo. By critically examining the language and ideologies embedded in four CASEL documents, this thesis advocates for a reconceptualization of SEL from an anti-oppressive lens— a lens that addresses and integrates the complexities of sociocultural difference. It calls for an SEL that is not only responsive to but actively engaged in addressing the social and institutional barriers that hinder equitable educational experiences. This research contributes to the ongoing debate on SEL's role in education, offering insights into the need for SEL to evolve beyond a tool of social compliance to become a catalyst for disrupting the status quo.

Item Metadata

ubc_2024_november_gupta_adishi.pdf -- 1.12MB

Item Citations and Data

Permanent URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0443551

Download Metadata

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

LIVE DISCOURSE
BLOG / OPINION
SUBMIT PRESS RELEASE
Advertisement
Knowledge Partnership
Media Partnership
Science & Environment

India Advocates for Regulated Tourism in Antarctica at 46th ATCM

India emphasized the need for regulated tourism in antarctica at the 46th antarctic treaty consultative meeting (atcm) in kochi. the initiative aims to protect the continent's ecological integrity amid rising tourist numbers. the forum also discussed building a new indian research station, maitri-ii..

India on Tuesday made a strong pitch for regulated tourism in Antarctica saying it was a front-burner issue as the number of tourists visiting the icy continent has increased significantly over the past few years.

''This icy expanse is not just a frozen desert; it is a dynamic, living laboratory that demands our highest commitment to protection and study,'' Earth Sciences Minister Kiren Rijiju said at the inauguration of the 46th Antarctica Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) here.

Considered as the Parliament for Antarctica, the ATCM is the highest forum for governing the icy continent with the participation of 56 countries, 29 of whom enjoy the consultative status, which comes with decision making powers. The ATCM takes all decisions by consensus.

A separate working group on developing a framework for regulating tourism in Antarctica has been set up at the ATCM that got underway here.

At the outset, the ATCM elected former deputy national security adviser Pankaj Saran as the chairman for the 10-day deliberations that are scheduled to conclude on May 30. The 26th meeting of the Committee for Environment Protection is also being held during this period.

Rijiju also announced India's plans to build a new research station Maitri-II to strengthen capabilities to conduct vital research, particularly in connection with the instability of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet.

Voicing concern over the increase in the number of tourists in Antarctica, M Ravichandran, Secretary, Ministry of Earth Sciences, said it was the collective resolve of the ATCM to ensure that all activities, including research and tourism, were conducted in a manner that preserve its ecological integrity for future generations.

''India is honoured to lead this crucial initiative at the 46th ATCM that is expected to bring a series of actionable recommendations to be incorporated into the broader framework of the Antarctic Treaty System,'' said Ravichandran, the head of the Indian delegation.

He said regulating tourism in Antarctica has been on the agenda since 1966 and a dedicated working group for the purpose has been formulated for the first time at the 46th ATCM hosted by India.

Researchers discover new genetic mutation for congenital thyroid condition

Olive oil consumption associated with reduced mortality risk from dementia: research findings, maldives denies chinese research vessel activities linked to dispute with india, springer nature and department of atomic energy, india partner to advance open research through transformative agreement, india's semiconductor ambition takes shape as lam research eyes supply chain establishment.

Health Sector Highlights: FDA Bird Flu Tests, AI Drug Development, and Diabe...

Fraser-McGurk and Matthew Short Join Australian T20 World Cup Squad

UNHCR commends Brazil's outstanding solidarity and inclusive approach to ref...

Yellen Urges German Banks to Tighten Sanctions Compliance Against Russia

Latest news, thoothukudi: locals pay tribute to persons killed in anti-sterlite copper plant protests, spain and ireland to recognize independent palestinian state, from small town dreams to cannes red carpet: india’s first pageant director shines, citigroup fined £61.6m for system failures by uk regulators.

OPINION / BLOG / INTERVIEW

Bridging the digital divide: harnessing technology for climate action, ai in action: how the asian development bank is transforming asia and the pacific, digital health revolution: transforming primary care in asia and the pacific, urban sustainability: paving the way for greener cities in zurich and geneva, connect us on.

ADVERTISEMENT
KNOWLEDGE PARTNERSHIP
MEDIA PARTNERSHIP
Agro-Forestry
Art & Culture
Economy & Business
Energy & Extractives
Law & Governance
Science & Environment
Social & Gender
Urban Development
East and South East Asia
Europe and Central Asia
Central Africa
East Africa
Southern Africa
West Africa
Middle East and North Africa
North America
Latin America and Caribbean

OTHER PRODUCTS

Email: [email protected] Phone: +91-720-6444012, +91-7027739813, 14, 15

IMAGES

Discourse Analysis
Discourse Analysis Research Methodology
Discourse Analysis| Introduction to Discourse Analysis| Methodologies|
What is Discourse Analysis
Discourse Analysis in Research
Discourse Analysis| Introduction to Discourse Analysis| Methodologies|

VIDEO

Coherence
Lets do qualitative research through discourse analysis
Discourse analysis ( chapter1-what is discourse analysis )
What is Critical Discourse Analysis
SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS
Research in Discourse Analysis: A Comprehensive Guide

COMMENTS

Discourse Analysis
Interpretive approach: Discourse analysis is an interpretive approach, meaning that it seeks to understand the meaning and significance of language use from the perspective of the participants in a particular discourse. Emphasis on reflexivity: Discourse analysis emphasizes the importance of reflexivity, or self-awareness, in the research process.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical discourse analysis (or discourse analysis) is a research method for studying written or spoken language in relation to its social context. It aims to understand how language is used in real life situations. When you conduct discourse analysis, you might focus on: The purposes and effects of different types of language.
What Is Discourse Analysis? Definition + Examples
As Wodak and Krzyżanowski (2008) put it: "discourse analysis provides a general framework to problem-oriented social research". Basically, discourse analysis is used to conduct research on the use of language in context in a wide variety of social problems (i.e., issues in society that affect individuals negatively).
Critical Discourse Analysis
How language use relates to its social, political, and historical context. Discourse analysis is a common qualitative research method in many humanities and social science disciplines, including linguistics, sociology, anthropology, psychology, and cultural studies. It is also called critical discourse analysis.
Discourse analysis
Discourse analysis (DA), or discourse studies, is an approach to the analysis of written, spoken, or sign language, including any significant semiotic event. The objects of discourse analysis ( discourse , writing, conversation, communicative event ) are variously defined in terms of coherent sequences of sentences , propositions , speech , or ...
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis
The second edition of the highly successful Handbook of Discourse Analysis has been expanded and thoroughly updated to reflect the very latest research to have developed since the original publication, including new theoretical paradigms and discourse-analytic models, in an authoritative two-volume set. Twenty new chapters highlight emerging trends and the latest areas of research ...
Rigor, Transparency, Evidence, and Representation in Discourse Analysis
A synthesis of the literature suggests that key challenges of qualitative research include conducting data analyses that are systematic and properly informed by their respective theoretical and epistemological underpinnings, maintaining transparency of methodological processes, providing evidence that warrants knowledge claims, and representing data and analysis in ways that substantiate the ...
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis
Deborah Schiffrin is Professor of Linguistics at Georgetown University. Her research interests include narrative, life stories, oral histories of the Holocaust, dis-course markers, referring terms, grammar and interaction, language and identity, and language and public memorial. Major publications include Discourse Markers (Cambridge University ...
Discourse Analysis
Discourse analysis is both a methodology and an approach to the analysis of discourse. It is a term used for the examination and analysis of speech and writing, though other texts which give meaning are included in the definition of discourse. The chapter outlines what discourse analysis is; shows the importance of context and culture in this ...
Discourse analysis
This articles explores how discourse analysis is useful for a wide range of research questions in health care and the health professions Previous articles in this series discussed several methodological approaches used by qualitative researchers in the health professions. This article focuses on discourse analysis. It provides background information for those who will encounter this approach ...
Discourse Analysis
Description. Discourse analysis (DA) draws from a diverse range of intellectual sources including classical studies of rhetoric, post-structuralism, ethnomethodology, speech-act philosophy, social psychology, and linguistics. However, a central identifying feature of DA is that it concentrates on the way discourse acts on and creates our reality.
Discourse Analysis: Combining Rigor With Application and Intervention
As a distinctively qualitative methodology for Psychology, discourse analysis (DA) emerged out of the "turn to language"' and the emergence of social constructionism in the social sciences in late 1970s and 1980s (see Potter, 2012).Over the last several decades, DA has proliferated, becoming an umbrella methodology encompassing a wide range of language-focused methods and research arenas ...
Multi-Method Qualitative Text and Discourse Analysis: A Methodological
Qualitative researchers have developed a wide range of methods of analysis to make sense of textual data, one of the most common forms of data used in qualitative research (Attride-Stirling, 2001; Cho & Trent, 2006; Stenvoll & Svensson, 2011).As a result, qualitative text and discourse analysis (QTDA) has become a thriving methodological space characterized by the diversity of its approaches ...
What is Discourse Analysis? An Introduction & Guide
Discourse analysis is a qualitative research method for studying "language in context."[1] The process goes beyond analyzing words and sentences, establishing a deeper context about how language is used to engage in actions and form social identity. In Gee's (2011) view, language is always used from a perspective and always occurs within ...
Discourse Analysis
Discourse Analysis. Melissa N.P. Johnson, Ethan McLean, in International Encyclopedia of Human Geography (Second Edition), 2020 Abstract. Discourse analysis is a field of research composed of multiple heterogeneous, largely qualitative, approaches to the study of relationships between language-in-use and the social world. Researchers in the field typically view language as a form of social ...
Unpacking the worlds in our words: Critical discourse analysis and
Critical discourse analysis is a rapidly growing, ... This article seeks to provide clarity on critical discourse analysis as an approach to research and to highlight its relevance to social work scholarship, particularly in relation to its vital role in identifying and analyzing how discursive practices establish, maintain, and promote ...
Discourse Analysis
Like any other research in discourse analysis, it's essential to have a research question to proceed with your study. After selecting your research question, you need to find out the relevant resources to find the answer to it. Discourse analysis can be applied to smaller or larger samples depending on your research's aims and requirements.
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS: KEY CONCEPTS AND PERSPECTIVES
Carter (1993) specifies several denotations of the word 'discourse. First, it refers to the topics or types of language used in de finite contexts. Here, it. is possible to talk of political ...
What is Discourse Analysis? Explained
Discourse Analysis (DA) is a research approach that examines the ways in which language is used in texts and contexts. It is important for several reasons: Understanding Communication: DA helps in understanding how communication works beyond the level of sentences. It examines how choices in language contribute to the way ideas, identities ...
Discourse analysis: A useful methodology for health-care system
Abstract. Discourse analysis (DA) is an interdisciplinary field of inquiry and becoming an increasingly popular research strategy for researchers in various disciplines which has been little employed by health-care researchers. The methodology involves a focus on the sociocultural and political context in which text and talk occur.
Methods and Approaches of Discourse Analysis
Discourse Analysis (DA) can be approached through qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods, depending on the research objectives, the nature of the data, and the theoretical framework adopted. Understanding these different approaches and how they can be integrated provides a comprehensive toolkit for researchers in the field.
Qualitative research approaches and designs: discourse analysis
Our approach fo cuses on defining discourse analysis as a qualitative research. through three perspectives: 1. identifying its peculiarities as a qualitative research. 2. its peculiarity due to ...
(PDF) DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
discourse analysis is a method for the analysis of connected speech or. writing, for continuing descriptive linguistics beyond the limit of a simple. sentence at a time (Harris 1952). Meanwhile ...
Do we dare disturb the status quo? : a critical discourse analysis of
Learning, knowledge, research, insight: welcome to the world of UBC Library, the second-largest academic research library in Canada. T. This thesis engages in a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) framework to uncover and critique the underlying discourses that shape and ...
The Explanatory Power of Discourse Analysis
Discourse analysis is the term used to group all approaches in qualitative research that focus on analyzing discursive practices, that is, the nexus of activities, typically linguistic or otherwise symbolic, that characterize social practices such as science, politics, religion, and so on.
Journalism and Media
This exploratory and analytical research examines secondary sources to propose a résumé of professional roles for journalists to revitalize their roles within social and political coexistence. It aims to bridge the gap between theoretical concepts and practical applications, enhancing journalists' impact on public discourse and informed decision-making. Empirical research will guide these ...
The use of the term Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic in The Voice and
Research has also evidenced that mainstream news organisations can be overly critical of minority communities, conflating their perceived flaws and condemning minorities as a method to delegitimise claims of mistreatment or differential outcomes. ... Asian and Minority Ethnic in The Voice and Eastern Eye newspapers, a discourse analysis of ...
India Advocates for Regulated Tourism in Antarctica at 46th ATCM
Advertisement. India emphasized the need for regulated tourism in Antarctica at the 46th Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) in Kochi. The initiative aims to protect the continent's ecological integrity amid rising tourist numbers. The forum also discussed building a new Indian research station, Maitri-II.

Discourse Analysis – Methods, Types and Examples

Discourse Analysis

Types of Discourse Analysis

Conversation Analysis

Critical discourse Analysis

Discursive Psychology

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

Corpus-based Discourse Analysis

Descriptive Discourse

Narrative Discourse

Expository Discourse

Argumentative Discourse

Discourse Analysis Conducting Guide

Applications of Discourse Analysis

When to use Discourse Analysis

Examples of Discourse Analysis

Purpose of Discourse Analysis

Characteristics of Discourse Analysis

Advantages of Discourse Analysis

Limitations of Discourse Analysis

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

You may also like

Cluster Analysis – Types, Methods and Examples

Discriminant Analysis – Methods, Types and...

MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance) –...

Documentary Analysis – Methods, Applications and...

ANOVA (Analysis of variance) – Formulas, Types...

Graphical Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

What (Exactly) Is Discourse Analysis? A Plain-Language Explanation & Definition (With Examples)

Overview: Discourse Analysis Basics

What is discourse analysis?

When should you use discourse analysis?

Discourse Analysis: The main approaches

Need a helping hand?

How to “do” discourse analysis

Let’s recap…

Psst... there’s more!

You Might Also Like:

30 Comments

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Have a language expert improve your writing

Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples

Table of contents

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Step 1: Define the research question and select the content of analysis

Step 2: Gather information and theory on the context

Step 3: Analyse the content for themes and patterns

Step 4: Review your results and draw conclusions

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked

Search form

Discourse analysis

What is discourse analysis?

What is formal linguistic discourse analysis?

What is empirical discourse analysis?

Box 1 An empirical discourse analysis (genre analysis) of case presentations by medical students*

What is critical discourse analysis?

What should we be looking for in a discourse analysis?

Box 2 Further reading

Journal articles

Summary points

Discourse Analysis

Description

Access this chapter

Author information

Corresponding author

Editor information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Download citation

Share this entry

Discourse Analysis – A Definitive Guide With Steps & Types

What is Discourse Analysis?

Aims of Discourse Analysis

Uses of Discourse Analysis

Materials Used in Discourse Analysis

Types of Discourse