Cited by 67Language, Discourse, Communication StrategiesQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsLinguistics and Discourse Analysis

The Generalizability of Discursive Research

Open access
Goodman, Simon·2008·Qualitative Research in Psychology

Abstract

This paper shows how the accepted notion that discourse analytic findings must compromise generalizability to gain a detailed understanding of the area being investigated need not be the case. Instead, I show how such findings can be considered generalizable to the extent that they can show how a particular discursive strategy will often bring about the same interactional results. This means that discourse analysts can, and arguably should, claim that a discursive strategy that they have identified will accomplish similar rhetorical effects in a variety of interactions. This paper discusses what is meant by generalizability and then uses existing conversation analytic and discursive findings and examples from my own data where existing prejudice is used to justify further prejudice to illustrate the generalizability of such findings. I conclude by discussing the extent to which generalizations are possible and the implications of being able to make claims of generalizability for the discipline.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14780880802465890

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goodman, S.
Affiliations
Coventry University (GB)
Corresponding author
Goodman, Simon
Venue
Qualitative Research in Psychology
Published
2008-11-17
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
265-275
ISSN
  • 1478-0887 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-0895
OpenAlex
W2062809577
Cited by
67
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
26.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Qualitative Research in Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Coventry University Open Collections (Coventry university) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • The Open Collections (Coventry University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
Keywords
generalizability, discursive strategies, rhetorical effect, prejudice, conversation analysis, discourse analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review