Diskursanalyse - ein Forschungsbericht über Etablierungsprobleme einer Analysestrategie

"Die Diskursanalyse ist ein sich in den Sozialwissenschaften etablierendes und zugleich wegen seiner schwierigen Umsetzung umstrittenes Forschungsverfahren. Die Frage, ob die Diskursanalyse methodisierbar ist oder nicht, steht im Mittelpunkt der sozialwissenschaftlichen Diskussion um diesen Forschungsansatz und damit auch die Frage, ob Diskursanalyse als Methodik, Methodologie oder Methodenkritik zu begreifen ist. Im Folgenden wird vor dem Hintergrund der Erfahrungen eines von der DFG geförderten und am Lehrstuhl für Allgemeine Pädagogik und Theorie der Sozialpädagogik an der FSU Jena durchgeführten Forschungsprojektes die Entwicklung und Umsetzung eines diskursanalytischen Forschungszugangs beschrieben. Es wird dafür plädiert, von strengen Methodisierungsversuchen Abstand zu nehmen. Diskursanalyse wird als Hybrid begriffen, d.h., sie ist sowohl gegenstandskonstituierende Theorie als auch Forschungsstrategie. Diese scheinbare strukturelle Schwäche verlangt zwar vom Forscher ein hohes Maß an Reflexionsvermögen und Plausibilität bei der Umsetzung, um der Gefahr eines sich selbst beweisenden Verfahrens zu entgehen, impliziert aber ebenso das erkenntnisgenerierende Potenzial der Diskursanalyse. Der Aufsatz ist die Beschreibung einer Strategie oder exakter als Rationalisierung eines retrospektiv rekonstruierten Forschungsweges zu begreifen. Dargestellt wird, wie die Forschergruppe zu ihrem Materialzugang gelangte, wobei auch der Zufall eine Rolle spielte. Im Kern geht es um die Entwicklung eines bestimmten Diskursverständnisses, welches von bisherigen Verfahren, die auf Foucault rekurrieren, abweicht und zugleich erklärt, warum ein streng methodischer Zugang die Erkenntnispotenziale der Diskursanalyse degradiert. Ein Kernproblem aber ist und bleibt die Materialauswahl. Untermauert wird die Bedeutung der Offenheit des Verfahrens, angeboten wird eine Methodologie, welche gerade die Fruchtbarkeit eines Zusammenfalls von Theorie und Methodologie belegt bzw. umgekehrt sich aus ihr ergibt." (Autorenreferat)"On the one hand the method of discourse analysis is quite common among the social sciences. On the other hand it is controversial because it's difficult to handle. The question wether the discourse analysis is methodicable or not is the core issue of the discussion about that approach, as well as the question wether it is a single methodology, a study of different methodologies or a criticism of a methodology. Based on the experiences with a DFG-funded researchproject, which was implemented by the professorship of general educational science and theory of social education at the FSU Jena, the following text describes the development and implementation of a discourse analytic research-approach during this project. The text recommends not to methodize the discourse analysis too strict. It is seen as an hybrid, that means it is a theory that constitutes its own subject and it is a research-strategy as well. This apparent weakness in structure demands from the researcher a high degree of reflectivity and verisimilitude to avoid the dangers of an self-fulfilling theory. But this weakness also implements the knowledge generating potential of the discourse analysis. The article contains the explanation of a strategy, or more precisely it must be understood as a retrospective reconstruction of a way of research. It will be explained how the group of researchers gained access to their material and how incidence helped them. The core issue of the article is the development of a new understanding about discourses, which differs from the common understanding that refers back to Foucault. This new perspective also explains why a strict methodical approach lowers the potential of gaining knowledge with the discourse analysis. A major problem stays the selection of the material. The importance of an open procedure/mode/process is also shown in the text. It also offers a methodology which proofs the advantages of the simultaneity of theory and methodology or respectively develops out of it." (author's abstract

Winfried Marotzki / Lothar Wigger (Hrsg.): Erziehungsdiskurse. Bad Heilbrun: Klinkhardt 2008 (24 S.) [Rezension]

Rezension von: Winfried Marotzki / Lothar Wigger (Hrsg.): Erziehungsdiskurse. Bad Heilbrun: Klinkhardt 2008 (24 S.; ISBN 978-3-7815-1583-3; 19,80 EUR)

Das DFG-Netzwerk „Ratgeben und Ratnehmen“

Der Beitrag präsentiert die Arbeit eines DFG-Netzwerks zur Erforschung von Ratgebermedien in Form eines Zwischen- und Erfahrungsberichts. Neben einer Darstellung der verschiedenen Forschungszugänge innerhalb des Netzwerks diskutiert er Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer Zusammenarbeit der Netzwerkmitglieder vor dem Hintergrund der notwendigen Sensibilität im Umgang mit Forschungsdaten

Measuring self-regulation in everyday life: reliability and validity of smartphone-based experiments in alcohol use disorder

Self-regulation, the ability to guide behavior according to one’s goals, plays an integral role in understanding loss of control over unwanted behaviors, for example in alcohol use disorder (AUD). Yet, experimental tasks that measure processes underlying self-regulation are not easy to deploy in contexts where such behaviors usually occur, namely outside the laboratory, and in clinical populations such as people with AUD. Moreover, lab-based tasks have been criticized for poor test–retest reliability and lack of construct validity. Smartphones can be used to deploy tasks in the field, but often require shorter versions of tasks, which may further decrease reliability. Here, we show that combining smartphone-based tasks with joint hierarchical modeling of longitudinal data can overcome at least some of these shortcomings. We test four short smartphone-based tasks outside the laboratory in a large sample (N = 488) of participants with AUD. Although task measures indeed have low reliability when data are analyzed traditionally by modeling each session separately, joint modeling of longitudinal data increases reliability to good and oftentimes excellent levels. We next test the measures’ construct validity and show that extracted latent factors are indeed in line with theoretical accounts of cognitive control and decision-making. Finally, we demonstrate that a resulting cognitive control factor relates to a real-life measure of drinking behavior and yields stronger correlations than single measures based on traditional analyses. Our findings demonstrate how short, smartphone-based task measures, when analyzed with joint hierarchical modeling and latent factor analysis, can overcome frequently reported shortcomings of experimental tasks

Measuring self-regulation in everyday life: Reliability and validity of smartphone-based experiments in alcohol use disorder

Self-regulation, the ability to guide behavior according to one's goals, plays an integral role in understanding loss of control over unwanted behaviors, for example in alcohol use disorder (AUD). Yet, experimental tasks that measure processes underlying self-regulation are not easy to deploy in contexts where such behaviors usually occur, namely outside the laboratory, and in clinical populations such as people with AUD. Moreover, lab-based tasks have been criticized for poor test-retest reliability and lack of construct validity. Smartphones can be used to deploy tasks in the field, but often require shorter versions of tasks, which may further decrease reliability. Here, we show that combining smartphone-based tasks with joint hierarchical modeling of longitudinal data can overcome at least some of these shortcomings. We test four short smartphone-based tasks outside the laboratory in a large sample (N = 488) of participants with AUD. Although task measures indeed have low reliability when data are analyzed traditionally by modeling each session separately, joint modeling of longitudinal data increases reliability to good and oftentimes excellent levels. We next test the measures' construct validity and show that extracted latent factors are indeed in line with theoretical accounts of cognitive control and decision-making. Finally, we demonstrate that a resulting cognitive control factor relates to a real-life measure of drinking behavior and yields stronger correlations than single measures based on traditional analyses. Our findings demonstrate how short, smartphone-based task measures, when analyzed with joint hierarchical modeling and latent factor analysis, can overcome frequently reported shortcomings of experimental tasks

Patterns of alcohol consumption among individuals with alcohol use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns in Germany

Objective: To examine whether lockdown measures are associated with AC and consumption-related temporal and psychological within-person mechanisms. Design, setting, and participants: This quantitative, intensive, longitudinal cohort study recruited 1743 participants from 3 sites from February 20, 2020, to February 28, 2021. Data were provided before and within the second lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: before lockdown (October 2 to November 1, 2020); light lockdown (November 2 to December 15, 2020); and hard lockdown (December 16, 2020, to February 28, 2021). Main outcomes and measures: Daily ratings of AC (main outcome) captured during 3 lockdown phases (main variable) and temporal (weekends and holidays) and psychological (social isolation and drinking intention) correlates. Results: Of the 1743 screened participants, 189 (119 [63.0%] male; median [IQR] age, 37 [27.5-52.0] years) with at least 2 alcohol use disorder (AUD) criteria according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) yet without the need for medically supervised alcohol withdrawal were included. These individuals provided 14 694 smartphone ratings from October 2020 through February 2021. Multilevel modeling revealed significantly higher AC (grams of alcohol per day) on weekend days vs weekdays (β = 11.39; 95% CI, 10.00-12.77; P < .001). Alcohol consumption was above the overall average on Christmas (β = 26.82; 95% CI, 21.87-31.77; P < .001) and New Year's Eve (β = 66.88; 95% CI, 59.22-74.54; P < .001). During the hard lockdown, perceived social isolation was significantly higher (β = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.06-0.15; P < .001), but AC was significantly lower (β = -5.45; 95% CI, -8.00 to -2.90; P = .001). Independent of lockdown, intention to drink less alcohol was associated with lower AC (β = -11.10; 95% CI, -13.63 to -8.58; P < .001). Notably, differences in AC between weekend and weekdays decreased both during the hard lockdown (β = -6.14; 95% CI, -9.96 to -2.31; P = .002) and in participants with severe AUD (β = -6.26; 95% CI, -10.18 to -2.34; P = .002). Conclusions and relevance: This 5-month cohort study found no immediate negative associations of lockdown measures with overall AC. Rather, weekend-weekday and holiday AC patterns exceeded lockdown effects. Differences in AC between weekend days and weekdays evinced that weekend drinking cycles decreased as a function of AUD severity and lockdown measures, indicating a potential mechanism of losing and regaining control. This finding suggests that temporal patterns and drinking intention constitute promising targets for prevention and intervention, even in high-risk individuals

Patterns of Alcohol Consumption Among Individuals With Alcohol Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Lockdowns in Germany

Importance Alcohol consumption (AC) leads to death and disability worldwide. Ongoing discussions on potential negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on AC need to be informed by real-world evidence. Objective To examine whether lockdown measures are associated with AC and consumption-related temporal and psychological within-person mechanisms. Design, Setting, and Participants This quantitative, intensive, longitudinal cohort study recruited 1743 participants from 3 sites from February 20, 2020, to February 28, 2021. Data were provided before and within the second lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: before lockdown (October 2 to November 1, 2020); light lockdown (November 2 to December 15, 2020); and hard lockdown (December 16, 2020, to February 28, 2021). Main Outcomes and Measures Daily ratings of AC (main outcome) captured during 3 lockdown phases (main variable) and temporal (weekends and holidays) and psychological (social isolation and drinking intention) correlates. Results Of the 1743 screened participants, 189 (119 [63.0%] male; median [IQR] age, 37 [27.5-52.0] years) with at least 2 alcohol use disorder (AUD) criteria according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) yet without the need for medically supervised alcohol withdrawal were included. These individuals provided 14 694 smartphone ratings from October 2020 through February 2021. Multilevel modeling revealed significantly higher AC (grams of alcohol per day) on weekend days vs weekdays (β = 11.39; 95% CI, 10.00-12.77; P < .001). Alcohol consumption was above the overall average on Christmas (β = 26.82; 95% CI, 21.87-31.77; P < .001) and New Year’s Eve (β = 66.88; 95% CI, 59.22-74.54; P < .001). During the hard lockdown, perceived social isolation was significantly higher (β = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.06-0.15; P < .001), but AC was significantly lower (β = −5.45; 95% CI, −8.00 to −2.90; P = .001). Independent of lockdown, intention to drink less alcohol was associated with lower AC (β = −11.10; 95% CI, −13.63 to −8.58; P < .001). Notably, differences in AC between weekend and weekdays decreased both during the hard lockdown (β = −6.14; 95% CI, −9.96 to −2.31; P = .002) and in participants with severe AUD (β = −6.26; 95% CI, −10.18 to −2.34; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance This 5-month cohort study found no immediate negative associations of lockdown measures with overall AC. Rather, weekend-weekday and holiday AC patterns exceeded lockdown effects. Differences in AC between weekend days and weekdays evinced that weekend drinking cycles decreased as a function of AUD severity and lockdown measures, indicating a potential mechanism of losing and regaining control. This finding suggests that temporal patterns and drinking intention constitute promising targets for prevention and intervention, even in high-risk individuals

Reseña: Reiner Keller, Andreas Hirseland, Werner Schneider & Willy Viehöver (Eds.) (2006). Handbuch Sozialwissenschaftliche Diskursanalyse. Band I: Theorien und Methoden [Manual sobre el análisis del discurso en ciencias sociales. Teorías y métodos]

Das Handbuch gibt einen umfassenden Überblick über die inzwischen etablierte, aber auch unübersichtlich gewordene theoretisch-methodologische Begründung und Anwendung der Diskursanalyse. Der erreichte Ausdifferenzierungsgrad der Diskursanalyse mit ihren verschiedenen Wurzeln und deren Kombinationen gibt dem Buch eine zusätzliche Bedeutung als Versuch einer Systematisierung der Forschungsvielfalt innerhalb der Sozialwissenschaften. Schwerpunkt bildet die Diskursanalyse nach FOUCAULT. Im Mittelpunkt steht die Frage nach der forschungspraktischen Umsetzung einer sozialwissenschaftlichen Diskursanalyse. Widersprüche zwischen den Artikeln sind angesichts der Offenheit der theoretischen Grundlagen unvermeidbar. Folgerichtig ist die Diskursanalyse als heterogene Forschungsstrategie und nicht als stringente Methode zu begreifen. Lässt sich der/die Lesende auf Vielfalt und Differenz ein, ermutigt und hilft das Handbuch, eigene Forschungsprojekte umzusetzen. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0801143The handbook gives a general overview of the established—but increasingly complex—theoretical and methodological practice of discourse analysis. The attempt is made to systematize the diversity of discourse analysis, with its different historical roots and fields of research in the social sciences, even though the focus is mainly on FOUCAULT's approach. Thus, the handbook has to be understood as an important step towards a insertion of discourse analysis into social science. Although there are unavoidable contradictions between the articles—almost because of the open theoretical foundations—the handbook characterizes, as a whole, discourse analysis as a heterogeneous strategy of research rather than as a stringent method. With this approach, it can be a helpful guide for the reader’s own research projects. However, if one is looking for a precise method, the investment of time in discourse analysis could be wasted. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0801143El manual ofrece una visión general de la actual, aunque cada vez más compleja, práctica teórica y metodológica del análisis del discurso. Aunque se centra principalmente en el enfoque de FOUCAULT, se intenta sistematizar la diversidad del análisis del discurso, con sus diferentes raíces históricas y campos de investigación en las ciencias sociales. Por tanto, el manual tiene que ser comprendido como un paso importante hacia una inserción del análisis del discurso en la ciencia social. Aunque hay contradicciones inevitables entre los artículos – debido a los fundamentos teóricos abiertos – el manual caracteriza globalmente al análisis del discurso como una estrategia heterogénea de investigación, y no como un método riguroso. Con este enfoque, puede ser una guía provechosa para los proyectos de investigación de los propios lectores. Sin embargo, si uno está buscando un método preciso, puede ser una pérdida de tiempo invertir en el análisis del discurso. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs080114

Diskursanalyse in der Sozial- und Erziehungswissenschaft - eine ambivalente Erfolgsgeschichte

'Die' Diskursanalyse hat sich in den letzten 20 Jahren fest in der Erziehungs- respektive den Sozialwissenschaften, insbesondere im Kontext der qualitativen Sozialforschung etabliert. Die von Beginn an diskutierten Interpretationen des vor allem auf Arbeiten Michel Foucaults rekurrierenden Verfahrens finden sich bis heute und bewegen sich weiterhin zwischen Methodisierungsambitionen und einer ablehnenden Haltung gegenüber diesen. Einerseits zeichnet sich im Sinne einer Entwicklung eine massive Rezeption und Kombination verschiedenster sozialwissenschaftlicher Methoden (und Theorien) ab, andererseits ist die Situation von hochgradiger Kontinuität der Positionen geprägt. Der inzwischen genutzte Begriff der Diskursforschung ist Ausdruck dieser Heterogenisierung. Methodologisch zeigt sich ein Konsens weiterhin primär im Dissens, der jedoch erfolgreich 'gemanagt' wird.Over the last 20 years, "discourse analysis" has become firmly established in education and the social sciences, especially in the context of qualitative social research. The interpretations of this method, which is based primarily on the work of Michel Foucault, are still being discussed today and continue to move between methodological ambitions and a rejectionist attitude towards it. On the one hand, a massive reception and combination of the most diverse social science methods (and theories) is emerging in the sense of a development on the other hand, the situation is characterised by a high degree of continuity of positions. The term discourse research, which is now used, is an expression of this heterogenisation. Methodologically, consensus continues to be found primarily in dissent, which is, however, successfully managed