Speaker 1: In this video, we're going to unpack the sometimes tricky topic of discourse analysis. We'll explain what it is, consider its strengths and weaknesses, and discuss when and when not to use this analysis method. By the end of this video, you should have a clear understanding of the basics of discourse analysis so you can make an informed decision for your research project. By the way, if you're currently working on a dissertation, thesis, or research project, be sure to grab our free dissertation templates to help fast-track your write-up. These tried and tested templates provide a detailed roadmap to guide you through each chapter, section by section. If that sounds helpful, you can find the link in the description below. So, what exactly is discourse analysis? Well, simply put, discourse analysis is a qualitative analysis method that looks specifically at the subjective underlying meaning of language in written or spoken communication within the context in which it takes place. To break that down a little more, a good discourse analysis will interpret language in the appropriate social, cultural, political, and historical background, so as to draw out its meaning. That language data could be taken from interviews, speeches, group discussion transcripts, or even recordings. In other words, discourse analysis can be used on both primary and secondary data, making it quite a versatile analysis method. Does that sound a bit fluffy and conceptual? Let's look at an example to make it a little more tangible. Discourse analysis could potentially be a useful approach if you were, for example, researching people's perceptions of government policy on immigration. In that case, you might analyze the use and meaning of particular words and phrases taken from interview transcripts in the contemporary socio-political context. The idea would then be to identify and analyze the intended meaning of those words, rather than just their definition or frequency. As you can see, discourse analysis allows you to go deeper than just the surface level themes, as you might do with thematic analysis, or to observe the frequency of words or phrases, as you might with content analysis. Instead, its focus is squarely on meaning within context. By the way, if you're interested in learning more about the other analysis methods I mentioned, check out our analysis methods video up here, or follow the links in the description. Now that we've laid down some foundations, it's important to understand the two main ways in which you can approach discourse analysis. Specifically, these are the language in use approach and the socio-political approach. Each of these works a little differently and sounds a little worse than they are, so let's break down what they mean. First up is the language in use approach. Here, your analysis will focus on the technicalities in the use of language, such as grammar, syntax, and phonology. With this approach, the idea is to analyze how the finer details of language are used and manipulated within the context of communication. Let's look at an example to make this a little more tangible. The English language has a relatively inflexible subject-verb-object syntactical structure, producing sentences like, Sarah, the subject, wrote, the verb, a research paper, the object. So, if an English speaker were to say something like, the paper that Sarah wrote, a language in use analysis might investigate the function or effect of that sentence structure within a particular social context. For example, a politician might deliberately bend or break the rules of formal English syntax when speaking about a certain topic or in a certain context, and then adopt formal syntax in another. Here, a language in use analysis could reveal that particular speech patterns reflect assumptions about power, privilege, and class disparities between the speaker and their audience. Okay, now that we've looked at the language in use approach, next up, we've got the socio-political approach, which is sometimes also called the social constructivist approach. More accurately, we should say approaches, as there are a few potential routes within this category. Here, we get closer to the philosophical roots of discourse analysis, but don't worry, we'll cut through the complexities. One of the most common socio-political approaches is known as critical discourse analysis, or CDA. The main concerns of CDA are the use and dynamics of power and power relations. This kind of analysis is inspired by the philosopher Michel Foucault and his work on how language reflects power in society. For Foucault, almost all language tells us something about power and how it's used. That's all a little heavy, I know. So, let's look at an example of CDA in action. Let's imagine your research aims to explore the opinions of university students regarding the use of language in society. In one scenario, you might find that professors' thoughts and opinions are often treated with deference, respect, and authority, reflecting a kind of normalized power. This is the type of power that's expressed and imposed almost without anyone noticing because it's built into students' assumptions about professors. Conversely, in another scenario, at another university department, you might find that professors openly chastise students for speaking out of turn, which would reflect a form of repressive power. In this case, power is actively asserted and easily identified. Either way, critical discourse analysis would allow you to investigate the use of language and context to better understand power and its dynamics. So, to recap, discourse analysis can be undertaken using either a language-in-use approach, where you're focused on the technicalities of language, or a sociopolitical approach, where you're interested in the use of language to express normalized or repressive power and its dynamics. Now that we have a clearer view of the different approaches available within discourse analysis, it will be useful to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this analysis method so that you can make the right choices for your research project. One of the main strengths of discourse analysis is the range of different types of information that it can incorporate. This includes speech transcripts, written records, interview responses, as well as non-text-based data types like audio recordings. This versatility allows you to develop a rich data set by using a variety of sources, which means you'll have a broader substantiation of your analyses and findings. Another benefit is that, almost by definition, discourse analysis highlights the nuances and contextualizing factors of your data, meaning your analyses and findings can have real-world implications for your research area. Additionally, discourse analysis can provide insight into how language is used to construct social reality and how it reflects social hierarchies, power dynamics, and ideologies. All that said, just like all analysis methods, discourse analysis has its weaknesses, and it's important that you understand these so that you can make the right decision for your project. First, there's the problem of interpretive expertise. Since discourse analysis focuses on investigating language, it relies on the researcher's familiarity with the language under study. In other words, if you're going to analyze the use and manipulation of language to affect or change meaning, it's essential that you have a strong understanding of that language. This can even be true even within one language, since the same English words can mean very different things in different countries. Also, if your data includes information that has been translated or edited, there is a risk that the meaning will, quite literally, be lost in translation. The second weakness of discourse analysis is the related issue of reliability or the subjectivity of how your data is interpreted. Since discourse analysis relies almost entirely on the researcher's interpretation of the data, the findings and the conclusions won't always be empirically verifiable. Of course, discourse analysis isn't meant to be perfectly objective, given its focus on meaning, but it is important to make sure that your project's aims, objectives, and questions allow room for interpretation if you plan to use this method. Last but not least, it's important to recognize that discourse analysis can be very time-consuming. Although this type of analysis could be conducted by a team of researchers, organizing and maintaining interpretive consistency can get tricky. So, if you're considering using discourse analysis, make sure that you have factored in sufficient time to really dig into the data deeply. Qualitative analysis of any sort almost always takes a little longer than you expect. If you're enjoying this video so far, please help us out by hitting that like button. You can also subscribe for loads of plain language, actionable advice. If you're new to research, check out our free dissertation writing course, which covers everything you need to get started on your research project. As always, the links are in the description. Okay, so now we've covered the strengths and weaknesses of discourse analysis, it's important to discuss the question of when. In other words, when exactly would discourse analysis be appropriate, and when wouldn't it be? As a qualitative method focused on analyzing language and context to derive meaning, discourse analysis is usually most appropriate for research topics that are focused on social, political, or cultural phenomena and how they change across communicative contexts. For example, research aimed at evaluating changes in social attitudes to poverty might look at political speeches or newspaper articles to identify nuances in the use and manipulation of language around welfare, homelessness, and unemployment. Specifically, a language-in-use or socio-political approach to discourse analysis could then be used to investigate the technicalities of the language used in these cases, or the power dynamics that the language reflects. On the other hand, if your research is more narrowly focused and is not concerned with analyzing the meaning of language use, then discourse analysis would be less relevant. For example, if your research involves evaluating consumer responses to a new product or determining management methods for employee professional development, those research aims might be better suited to a more focused and verifiable analysis method, such as thematic analysis. If you'd like to learn more about alternative analysis methods, such as thematic analysis, content analysis, or narrative analysis, we've got a wealth of free information over on the Grad Coach blog. We'll include the link to that below this video. All right, that was a lot. Let's do a quick recap. Discourse analysis is a qualitative analysis method focused on meaning as derived from the analysis of language in context. As we explained, there are two approaches to discourse analysis. The language-in-use approach, where the focus is on the technicalities of how language is used, and the sociopolitical approach, where the focus is on the normalized or repressive power dynamics reflected in language. Just like all analysis methods, discourse analysis has a particular set of strengths and weaknesses. Based on those, discourse analysis is generally most appropriate for research that's focused on interpreting meaning as expressed in the use and manipulation of language in context. If you got value from this video, please hit that like button to help more students find this content. For more videos like this, check out the Grad Coach channel and subscribe for more plain language, actionable research tips and advice every week. Also, if you're looking for one-on-one support with your dissertation, your thesis, or your research project, be sure to check out our private coaching service, where we hold your hand throughout the research process, step-by-step. You can learn more about that and book a free initial consultation at gradcoach.com.