PDF (Whole Thesis) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern ...

considered and, where relevant, overcome for the purposes of this project, will be explained.
This research avoids the criticism lodged (whether accurate or not is open to interpretation) at
some qualitative researchers that “in many discussions of qualitative research there is a
reluctance of many (if not most) authors to lay bare the procedures associated with the
analysis of data” (Bryman & Burgess, 1994, p. 216) by being open about the procedures
undertaken in the analysis of data. This openness extends to other areas of the methodology,
as already explored in depth, such as disclosure of the researcher, and in the explicit stages of
analysis.
3.4.1 General criticisms relevant to this project.
A common criticism of CDA is that the findings of the research are predetermined and thus
the questions pursued and methodology used by researchers is flawed. This project avoids
predetermining findings by framing open-ended research questions to enable rigor to be
maintained. Rogers frames this recurring criticism of CDA as “…political and social
ideologies are projected onto the data rather than being revealed through the data” (2004, p.
14). This common criticism is identified and reported by, amongst others, Widdowson (1998,
1996), Price (1999), Parker and Burman (1993), Tyrwhitt-Drake (1999), Blommaert (2001)
and supported by Schegloff (1998) in his discussion of omitting information from the
findings in a related field, conversation analysis. Widdowson writes in relation to Fairclough,
and as part of the larger evidence of his suspicion of critical discourse analysts “…they do
this by the careful selection and partial interpretation of whatever linguistic features suit their
own ideological position and disregarding the rest” (1998, p. 146). Additionally, Tyrwhitt-
Drake, in criticising the process of analysis and demonstrating a suspicion of CDA writes,
“for some writers, the temptation to work backwards from their conclusion, seeking the
evidence that makes it inevitable, rather than forward to it, from objectively examined data, is
one they find themselves unable to resist” (1999, p. 1083). This is a sentiment echoed by
Verschueren, who finds poor analysis can occur despite rigorous theory and good text
selection, and explains “…theory being preconceived, it is not surprising, therefore, that
‘findings’ tend to be predictable and that a gap emerges between textual analysis and
conclusions…Texts are simply made into carriers…of what one already assumes to be the
case” (2001, p. 69).
A way these broad criticisms are avoided is the disclosure of the researcher’s perspectives; by
being open and explicit about what is brought, ideologically, to the data analysis. Doing this
92