Methoden vergleichen
Prüfen Sie die ausgewählten Methoden nebeneinander; abweichende Zeilen sind hervorgehoben.
| Interpretive Kritische Diskursanalyse× | Diskursanalyse× | |
|---|---|---|
| Fachgebiet≠ | Qualitativ | Qualitative Forschung |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Entstehungsjahr≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| Urheber≠ | Norman Fairclough; Ruth Wodak; Teun A. van Dijk (interpretive framing developed through constructivist qualitative traditions) | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| Typ≠ | Qualitative discourse analysis design | Method |
| Wegweisende Quelle≠ | Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Polity Press. ISBN: 978-0745612126 | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| Aliasnamen≠ | interpretive CDA, constructivist critical discourse analysis, meaning-centred CDA, CDA-interpretivist | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| Verwandt≠ | 6 | 2 |
| Zusammenfassung≠ | Interpretive critical discourse analysis (interpretive CDA) combines the power-and-ideology lens of critical discourse analysis with an interpretivist epistemology that foregrounds meaning-making, context, and the researcher's own positionality. It examines how language constructs social reality, legitimises or challenges power relations, and circulates ideological assumptions — while acknowledging that both the texts under study and the analyst's reading of them are socially situated and context-dependent. | Discourse analysis is a qualitative research methodology that examines how language, communication, and power shape meaning, identity, and social reality. Developed across linguistics, sociology, and psychology (particularly by Norman Fairclough and Jonathan Potter), discourse analysis goes beyond content to analyze language use as a social practice that constitutes and reflects power relations, ideologies, and social structures. |
| ScholarGateDatensatz ↗ |
|
|