discursive psychology.pdf (237.74 kB)
Discursive psychology: between method and paradigm
journal contribution
posted on 2012-03-02, 12:50 authored by Jonathan PotterHammersley (2003) criticizes a particular style of discourse research for developing as a distinct paradigm, yet lacking the coherence a paradigm would require. He suggests a range of problems in relation to constructionism, reflexivity and the ‘thin’ model of the human actor, and argues instead for methodological eclecticism in which discourse analytic methods are supplementary to alternatives. This commentary highlights a range of confusions and misunderstandings in this critique. In particular, it highlights the way discourse analytic work is connected to a range of theoretical notions, most fundamentally in its theorizing of discourse itself as a medium oriented to action. It identifies important sources of incoherence that can arise when mixing discourse analytic and more traditional methods. It reiterates the virtues of constructionism, particularly when considering the operation of descriptions, stresses the value of exploring (rather than ignoring) reflexive issues, and emphasizes the rich and nuanced approach to psychology that has been developed in this tradition.
History
School
- Social Sciences
Department
- Communication, Media, Social and Policy Studies
Citation
POTTER, J., 2003. Discursive psychology: between method and paradigm. Discourse and Society, 14 (6), pp. 783 - 794Publisher
© Sage PublicationsVersion
- AM (Accepted Manuscript)
Publication date
2003Notes
This article was published in the journal, Discourse and Society [© Sage Publications]. The definitive version is available at: http://das.sagepub.com/content/14/6/783ISSN
0957-9265;1460-3624Publisher version
Language
- en