Module: Research Methods in Psychology
Lecture 6: Disclosure Analysis 1
Overview
Go over some philosophical underpinnings of DA
Applying discursive psychology to a text
Questions
The world ‘out there’ is inaccessible to us – do you agree or disagree?
Depends what ‘out there’ is
It is as accessible as we make it
What we think vs what we see
In social constructionism, it is kind of taken to be the case.
We don’t see the colours as they actually are in the world
We see colours differently
How accessible is it? How much can we access? What implications does this
have when the world isn’t accessible to all of us? What does this mean in
terms of research? It means the research won’t have accurate results. What
do we count as accurate? Through use of biological measurements?
Thoughts have to constantly be translated into words and images
How we understand the world is the result of socio-linguistic interaction – do you
agree or disagree?
Agree – different languages impact their culture e.g. Russia has more words
for blue, therefore people there see more colours than us.
Some words can’t be translated into another language e.g. Swedish
Language creates meaning and we interact with social rules
Everything has to be translated into languages
Images can be determined by language but it’s not so obvious e.g. dreams
Sign language if you don’t know sign language, then you won’t know
what’s going on.
An example of how we are conditioned by social rules e.g. when to say
sir/madam – it would be strange to say it to a friend, but feels completely
normal to say that when applying for a job.
Example: it would be weird to ask someone what they did yesterday out of the
blue
Example: going to the doctor – what the doctor says to you would be weird if
the same thing is said to you by someone you just met.
We are not at the origin of our speech – do you agree or disagree?
Lecture 6: Disclosure Analysis 1
Overview
Go over some philosophical underpinnings of DA
Applying discursive psychology to a text
Questions
The world ‘out there’ is inaccessible to us – do you agree or disagree?
Depends what ‘out there’ is
It is as accessible as we make it
What we think vs what we see
In social constructionism, it is kind of taken to be the case.
We don’t see the colours as they actually are in the world
We see colours differently
How accessible is it? How much can we access? What implications does this
have when the world isn’t accessible to all of us? What does this mean in
terms of research? It means the research won’t have accurate results. What
do we count as accurate? Through use of biological measurements?
Thoughts have to constantly be translated into words and images
How we understand the world is the result of socio-linguistic interaction – do you
agree or disagree?
Agree – different languages impact their culture e.g. Russia has more words
for blue, therefore people there see more colours than us.
Some words can’t be translated into another language e.g. Swedish
Language creates meaning and we interact with social rules
Everything has to be translated into languages
Images can be determined by language but it’s not so obvious e.g. dreams
Sign language if you don’t know sign language, then you won’t know
what’s going on.
An example of how we are conditioned by social rules e.g. when to say
sir/madam – it would be strange to say it to a friend, but feels completely
normal to say that when applying for a job.
Example: it would be weird to ask someone what they did yesterday out of the
blue
Example: going to the doctor – what the doctor says to you would be weird if
the same thing is said to you by someone you just met.
We are not at the origin of our speech – do you agree or disagree?
