Metatheorizing in the sociological study of textual data


Trotsuk I.V.

Dr. Sci. (Soc.), Assoc. Prof., Sociology Chair, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia; Senior Researcher, Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia irina.trotsuk@yandex.ru

DOI: 10.7868/S0132162517090033
ID of the Article:


For citation:

Trotsuk I.V. Metatheorizing in the sociological study of textual data. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2017. No 9. P. 12-21




Abstract

The author aims to identify main formats of metatheorizing in sociology and its potential in the specific research area (analysis of textual (non-formalized) data) to solve the task of integrating its categorical apparatus, conceptual models and methodological decisions for empirical work. The author considers metatheorizing a necessary step for clarifying the grounds for sociological study of textual data, which is determined by the fact that interdisciplinary concepts ‘narrative’, ‘discourse’, ‘text’, etc. have become widely used in sociology, but were ‘borrowed’ from other disciplines uncritically, and, thus, became very ambiguous and intensified the debates about the criteria for choosing analytical ‘optics’, methodology and ‘rhetoric’ in empirical research. The problem of unambiguous definitions of the key concepts of textual analysis has not been solved yet, and the relationship of different versions of textual analysis (narrative, discursive, biographical, etc.) has not been clarified yet, which determines such common problems of empirical sociology as a low methodological level of publications, incomprehensibility of research procedures, etc. The author believes that metatheorizing (clarification of the categorical apparatus, integration of conceptual approaches into two models, reduction of techniques to content analysis and grouping of problems) can outline the ways to solve these problems.


Keywords
metatheorizing; sociological theory; textual (non-formalized) data; discourse analysis; content analysis; narrative analysis; biographical method

References

Barkin S.M., Gurevitch M. (1987) Out of work and on the air: Television news and unemployment. Critical Studies in Mass Communication. Vol. 4: 1–20.

Barthes R. (2000) Mythologies. Transl. from Fr., introduc. and comments. S. N. Zenkina. Moscow: Izd-vo im. Sabashnikovyh. (In Russ.)

Batygin G.S. (1995) Lectures on Methodology of Sociological Research. Moscow: Aspekt-Press. (In Russ.)

Bourdieu P., Wacquant L. (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicaho.

Burawoy M. (2005) For public sociology. American Sociological Review. Vol. 70(1): 4–28.

Devyatko I.F. (2003) Sociological Theories of Action and Practical Rationality. Moscow: Avanti plus.

Edwards D. (1997) Discourse and Cognition. London: Sage.

Fairclough N. (1993) Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: the universities. Discourse & Society. No. 4: 133–168.

Foucault M. (1996) The Order of Discourse. In: Lectures on the Will to Know: Lectures at the Colle` ge de France, 1970–1971, and Oedipal Knowledge. Moscow: Kastal’: 47–97. (In Russ.)

Glass G.V. (1976) Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher. No. 5: 3–8.

Ivanov D. (2013a) Evolution of sociology and evolutional metatheorizing. Teleskop [Telescope]. No. 4: 13–19. (In Russ.)

Ivanov D.V. (2013b) Stages of sociology evolution and dominant theorizing types. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2013. No. 9: 3–13. (In Russ.)

Kuznetsov A.M. (2000) Anthropology and anthropological turn in the contemporary social sciences and humanities. Lichnost’. Kul’tura. Obshhestvo [Personality. Culture. Society]. Vol. II. No.1: 49–68. (In Russ.)

Labov W. (2001) Uncovering the Event Structure of Narrative. Georgetown: Georgetown University.

Labov W., Waletzky J. (1997) Oral versions of personal experience: Three decades of narrative analysis. Special Volume of a Journal of Narrative and Life History. Vol. 7: 3–8.

Lewis M.W., Smith W.K. (2014) Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Vol. 50: 127–149.

Olkin I. (1990) History and goals. In: K. W. Wachter, M. L. Straf (eds). The Future of Meta-Analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 99–119.

Papakostas A. (2016) Civilizing the Public Sphere: Distrust, Trust and Corruption. Transl. From Eng. by D. Zhikharevicha. Moscow: WCIOM. (In Russ.).

Phillips L.J., Jorgensen M.V. (2004) Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. Harkiv: Gumanitarniy Centr. (In Russ.).

Richardson L. Writing sociology. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies. 2002. Vol. 2. No. 3: 414–422.

Ritzer G. (1990) Metatheorizing in sociology. Sociological Forum. No. 5: 156–167.

Ritzer G., Zhao Sh., Murphy J. (2001) Metatheorizing in sociology: The basic parameters and the potential contributions of postmodernism. In: J. H. Turner (ed.). Handbook of Sociological Theory. University of California: 244–288.

Sacks H., Schegloff E. A., Jefferson G. (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. Vol. 50. No.4: 696–735.

Sztompka P. (2008) Focus on everyday life: A new turn in sociology. European Review. Vol. 16. No. 1: 1–15.

Tarshis E. Ja. (2014) Content-analysis: Methodological Principles (Theoretical Basis. Ontology, Analytics, and Phenomenology of Text). Moscow: Librokom. (In Russ.).

Tatarova G.G. (1999) Methodology of Data Analysis (Introduction). Moscow: NOTA BENE. (In Russ.).

Tatarova G.G. (2006) Sociologist’s methodological trauma. Regarding the issue of knowledge integration. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 9: 3–12. (In Russ.).

Tatarova G.G. (2014) Coherence of integrative processes as precondition for improvement of empirical research quality in Russia. Sociologicheskie issledovanija [Sociological Studies]. No. 7: 72–84. (In Russ.).

Trotsuk I.V. (2014) Textual Analysis in Sociology: Problems and Promises of Different Types of Non-Structured Data ‘Reading’. Moscow: Izd-vo RUDN. (In Russ.).

Turner J. (1994) Analytical theorizing] Thesis. Issue 4: 119–157. (In Russ.).

van Dijk T.A. (2014) Discourse and Power: Representation of Dominance in Language and Communication. Transl. from Eng. by E. A. Kozhemjakina, E. V. Pereverzeva, A. M. Amatova. Moscow: Librokom. (In Russ.)

Zamyatin D.N. (2014) Postgeography. Capital(ism) of Geographical Images. Saint-Petersburg: Gumanitarnaya akademiya. (In Russ.)

Content No 9, 2017