Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Analiza calitativă comparativă de conținut× | Analiza comparativă a discursului× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Calitativ | Calitativ |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1983 (Mayring's QCA foundation); comparative adaptations prominent from 2000s onward | 1980s–1990s (established as comparative practice through the 1990s) |
| Autorul original≠ | Philipp Mayring (qualitative content analysis); comparative application developed across communication, policy, and social science research | Norman Fairclough; Ruth Wodak; Teun A. van Dijk |
| Tip≠ | Qualitative research design and analysis strategy | Qualitative comparative research approach |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Sage. ISBN: 978-0857029201 | Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Longman. ISBN: 978-0582219526 |
| Denumiri alternative | comparative QCA, cross-case qualitative content analysis, multi-context qualitative content analysis, comparative interpretive content analysis | CDA comparative, cross-context discourse analysis, comparative text analysis, multi-site discourse analysis |
| Înrudite≠ | 4 | 5 |
| Rezumat≠ | Comparative qualitative content analysis (comparative QCA) applies a systematic, category-driven reading of texts or documents across two or more cases, groups, time periods, or cultural contexts, with the explicit goal of identifying similarities, differences, and patterns that emerge from the comparison. It combines the interpretive rigour of qualitative content analysis with a structured comparative logic, making it valuable for cross-national policy research, media studies, and any inquiry that requires principled comparison of meaning across contexts. | Comparative discourse analysis examines how language constructs meaning, identity, and power by systematically contrasting texts or speech acts drawn from at least two distinct contexts, groups, time periods, or institutions. By holding analytical categories constant across cases, it reveals how discursive patterns diverge or converge, producing insights that single-context discourse analysis cannot generate. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|