Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Participatieve Kritische Discourseanalyse× | Discourseanalyse× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied≠ | Kwalitatief | Kwalitatief onderzoek |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1990s–2000s (emerged as integrated approach) | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| Grondlegger≠ | Draws on Ruth Wodak, Norman Fairclough (CDA) and Kurt Lewin, Orlando Fals Borda (participatory action research) | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| Type≠ | Qualitative research design and analysis approach | Method |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2001). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. Sage. ISBN: 978-0761961543 | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| Aliassen≠ | PCDA, participatory CDA, collaborative critical discourse analysis, action-oriented CDA | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| Verwant≠ | 6 | 2 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Participatory Critical Discourse Analysis (PCDA) integrates the ideology-exposing tools of Critical Discourse Analysis with the community-centred ethics of participatory action research. Researchers and community members jointly collect and analyse texts and talk to reveal how language constructs, legitimises, or contests unequal power relations — and then use those insights to drive concrete social change. | 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. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|