Final Post

Hello,

I would like to share some information and ask some questions from Antaki et al. study. This study is very important for me because I am still struggling to figure out what the discourse analysis really is and why we need this kind of analysis. It really requires kind of deeper consideration for me. I think it is because I conducted some qualitative research before and analyzed the data using thematic analysis. Since during the discourse analysis we try to understand more how the participant(s) says what he or she (they) want to say, I was confused about how to separate a thematic analysis from discourse analysis. I think this study was really helpful because the study explore the crucial requirements for discourse analysis.

I think both in thematic analysis and discourse analysis, the transcription is just a first step that prepares the researcher for analysis. To me, transcription is more important in discourse analysis than thematic analysis. When preparing for my presentation last week, I realized that I put all the umm..s, uhh..s, and ahh..s into my transcription. However, I did not even use any of them during my analysis because it was not important for my analysis. During my presentation last week, I understood how all these can be important for my analysis. I can basically say that I am more clear now since I overcome my misconception about the use of any detail in an interview or conversation.

  

Now, I am more clear that a summary cannot be a discourse analysis because it is shorter and tidier. A researcher needs more detail about the discursive constructions. Otherwise, he or she can lose information. This is called as “under-analysis through summary” by Antaki et al. I think what I did before was a kind of summary because I was just trying to explore certain themes focusing on what the participants said. 

The second issue is about the researchers’ position taking during the analysis. I am wondering if this issue is about the bias that the researcher is making. We always try to distance ourselves from the participants in terms of sympathy and scolding. I can understand this issues but what about if we realized the participants’ sympathy or scolding for us as researchers shape the participants talking? I think it may not be a big deal but it is still a little bit confusing. At this point, the quotes can help us to distance ourselves from the participants, but my last question is about “isolated quotation”. I am confused about it. What is the difference between the use over-quotation and isolated quotation?

Finally, I am really glad to take this course. I really appreciated with help and supports from at first Dr. Lester and then all my classmates. Since I am still working on my research, my plan is to take all other transcription into account and convert the study to a discourse analysis study. I think this is what this class has contributed to my academic carrier. I am really happy with it.

Thanks,