This article deals with the ways in which historical discourse analysis is at once different from and similar to research described as qualitative or quantitative. It discusses the consequences of applying the standards of such methods to historical discourse analysis. It is pointed out that although the merit of research using historical discourse analysis must not be judged by the standards of qualitative methods alone, it can be easier to admit the influence of the discourse on methodology. Therefore, the article considers whether and how the ideas of validity, reliability, sample, and transferability can be used to explain the merit of study using historical discourse analysis. The author also discusses the basic concepts and principles of historical discourse analysis, and he describes step-by-step a particular way of conducting historical discourse analysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ingólfur Ásgeir Jóhannesson (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: