Reading Chapter 7 of Hutchy et al. was helpful to me because part of the data in my mini-data project for this class is semi-structured interviews and reading this chapter helped me understand what aspects of the interviews I am analyzing, I should pay attention to; like to "state formulations" or if possible to use of insertions of "X" & "Y".
Actually, reading Chapter 8 reminded me of a discussion we had in one of our group activities in this class in which we were talking about the implications of DA and the "so what" of doing such research. What I read in this chapter implies that in such fields as political science, or those majors that deal with people with communication difficulties CA has some important applications in helping to achieve real-world objectives; however, in terms of my field of study - management & organization- I do believe that CA has important implications in cases where peers attempt to establish their power status in peer relationships via use of specific words, or taking specific turns, etc. Also, in terms of entrepreneurial identity which is my area of research, the use of words, their sequence of application by entrepreneurs, etc. can convey critical information about how they identify themselves as "entrepreneurs."
I also found the 8 points explicated in Potter, et al. (2012) about the way interviews are conducted, the role of interviewer, etc. very helpful. They've talked about some points that might seem minor but when actually conducting the interviews, they become critical because they influence the way the interview goes on which definitely impacts the way it is analyzed.
What I like about the readings around interview data is that the authors don't argue that you should never use interview data, but that you have to think about the entire context of the interview and consider it as an interactional event - rather than as an objective way of gathering consistent data. That seems like a useful approach to take.
ReplyDelete