8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
1/9
............-
BIOGRAPHICAL
RESEARCH
..
,
Biographical
rese rch
Gabriele
Rosenthal
' years since
1
first
_,.,.. than i•en., .
11 is no"' ~ i c l research in connecuo_n
caioe cross
1
..
11
was a time whcn th1s
JoCIOf
11 .....1
s. .
h .
lf
•
•lh mY be · ning
10
re-cstabhs .11Se
• -oach was e1n . . 1 .
t ' Y ' - ~
- ·n Gennan socio ogy in
half
a ce
ntlll'Y. i .
1
afkr ISO al the intemauonal leve .
~ c u l a r
phical rescarch bcgan in the
s o c 1 o l o g 1 c a a s s o c 1 o ¡ ~ o n
with thc migration study
1920s. 1n · b
Tlu Po ish
Pea
sant
in
Eumpe
and
m e r i c ~ y
W
.
11
J ••c Thomas and Flonan Zna01eck1
1
1am
,_
. . f Ch.
191
8-
20; 1958)
al
1h
e univers1ty o 1cago.
~ v e n
hen.
ernpirical work was already concen
trating on
thc single case study. Alongs1de
docu
mentar)' analysis on the m1grduon process, th1s
voluminous work
contains only one biography
of a
Poli
sh
mi
gran , commissioned by the
researchers. lt was no so much the concrete bio
graphical analysis that made this work so influen
tial for
subscque
nt
interpreta
ti
ve sociology
and
biographi
c
al
research, but rather the iwo authors'
general me hodological comments. One
of
the
most
importan was their demand that 'social
sc ienc
e can
nol
remain on
th
e surface of social
becoming,
wherc certain sc hools wish to have it
tloa , but mu
s
reach the actual human experi
cnces
and anitudes which constitute thc
full
live
and
active social reality beneath the formal ~ r g a
mzauon
of
soc ial
institution
s
(1958:
11
,
1834).
Biograph1cal research,
in
spired by this study
blo_somed al the Sociology Departmcnt
Ch1cago dunng the l920s al the initiative of
Emcst W Burgess and Robert
E
P· k
Rcscarche · ·
ar
.
. rs mouvated by r
ca
lization of th
~ c s s t
i t ~
of 'gcning insidc of the actor s p c r ~
...--
1vc now rccnun
d he
iographical -.,..izc
1
advantages of the
uve cue study for reeording the s
ubJ
ec-
pcnpcct1vcs of mcmbc f .
In thc 197°' sociol . rs
0
vanous milieus.
eummmg wod °fY mcreasingly began re
ing
lO
a
l a b l ~
: : , c h 1 ~ a g o Sc hool, lead
~ i c l
reicar h m m mtcrpreta
tive
e . Thc Í lnt antholo¡y
of
biographical resea_
ch was publi
sh .
in
1978 by
Martm
K ~ h l i and C
reader
by
. French
soc1ologist
Da
followed . m 1981.
This
rese·
hni
cl B
. h.
are
1
en•.
e x p a n ~ m g to
t 1s _day in the va
ri ende .:1
disc1phnes. In soc1ology today b.
0
us Spe' 1
increasingly
considered and ex; o g r a p h i e
f
·
1
. rnincd il\
construct o so c ia
reahty
in thc as
a
Oc·
1986
;
Fischer and Kohli
, 19
87),
wntten or
narr
ated b1ographies w cas lnita Ji
mentally as a
source of
specific i ~ ~ c used
As well
as
in
so ciology,
b i o g r a p ~ n n a t i o n
h
as
b
ec ome especially
wcll
e s t a b l i ~ ~ ~
re
_
Cart¡
history (Bornat, Chapter 2 ih· din O¡¡\
' IS V \
Thompson
, 1992; von Plato, 1998) and
0
u
lit
,
cational s c i e ~ c e s (A lheit, 1993,
¡9
94
_
he
a ~ d .M_rotzk1,
19 9
9) . Psychology _ K r u
d1sc1phne
also
began putting down
a c ~ r e
t .
roots
m the 1920s
and
l
930s
through th
l l l l
C
harlottc and
Karl
Bühler
an
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
2/9
M ~ ' ' -
HfEOIHG . . lh<
m c - ~ J rt-proJuction ol
cstal>
º'
creiiltOll . P'°'"..:SSL'S of uansforrna ·
1iJJN srrucfUl'CS anJ 'º M I
..
Jifc
hisiory)
. -
uucnng a1-' ' .
IJOll. Wbtfl lt -"()11.S
•
nr ofa fifc namitive
(rhe
~ 1 f c
~ 111_he i J c : r e d
mar
me prescnrauon
SIOI}'
mus• .
b<
- • ·
rirurec.l
by me prcscnl of
of pa."- cnrs
"
.ons. b. -nher
dercrrnincs
nie prtscnl ot
the
10i;
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
3/9
Ttl'lf'IU ,,_. . . ' '
·ontinue narr11tmg. i;uch
118
/\
alOGllAP'HICAL
llESEARCH
d ¡f.-'llllY 10 ~ n c . 1 ' . ' ' . through cyc
con1ac1.,
lld ~
of •
1
of
11
ucntion . Durmg lhis Phaselld
°htr
\
'
. -JOll
,.phr· iu
."
I listcn.c11rcfully.
makin
. n lhe
'
1
t-
I ';. biul
,ns1c
of in1en:s1
a .
('T\Jp-
..
e
l
t
r>ic:"'Cf". .....sswns . tivC intc phasCS in
their life or particular _.
~ . . . , ¡ , ~ i s 1 i c
~ ~ r ~ ~
Junnl
natfll
ra"cn1enl
10
situat¡l>fls ...._
rkc 11N•rn · . encou "'
ti,'tt
assume that these would not interest
che inllJ
.
viewer,
or
did it not
fit
with the i m a g c s h e o r ~
wants to present,
or
did he or
shc
find
it
oo
embarrassing
or
too painful to elaborate on th is'
This
can only be clarified in the
thematic
analysis (see below)
.
Sin
ce
the biographers
are
first encoura
ged ¡ ,
give a longer account
of
their own expenellCtl.
they
can structure
the
narration according tohc
criteria
they themselves find relev
an and
thc
d
V
. mm
memory process is supporte ·
18
cog
feelings or
subjects,
we
li
stcners also
ove from
~ , , .
experience
the
narrators al a rcm .
tblt
they
are telling about; it is rather che
cSS: ..
d
d
· h · narrauons ....,..
they are embed e m t e1r
.
1
cx riences
.
In co
ntrast
to
-nh1U ·
. .
lf
¡·
d
b
,og•pt· · ns and
descnpuons
.
se -
1ve
011110
argorne es additionally ha\'e the advantagc of
e , ; p c n c ~ s c r
10
. hat concretely happened .and
tic:•ng
el
. nced in the past m lhc narrated snua
w.S
expenert
from
restagi
ng
past si1ua1ions,
1iof1S·
.-'¡>11
is the only
way /ti cvme
e/ose
tu an
l
. 11
stoíY -
h ha d
th
1el 'º '
roJuc1ion ot
w al ppcn
e at
at
n t e ~ past expericncc"s gestalt. However, it
ufllC
or
the case
thal
argumentauons are
forrnu
is rather m ihe prescnt .pcrspective .and from the
1.ied fro
of
their social de:s1rab1hty. Wh1le,
m
ndPo
tnl
. .
th
ha
sta .
boUt experienccs.
1t 1s
e
case
t 1 we
ielhnl l
•
re with
our
memorics than with
the
inte llC
1
.
r explana1ion:s rcgarding what we
l i s l e ~ r . ; .
cd are dirccted
at the
interlocutors.
lf
e p e n e n a ~ l e
10
support the biograp.hers in their
we are
wilhout
posing any
add1t1onal ques-
_ ......uons . .
1
.. :
•
· ~ · und
if
manY memones eas1 y su11acc
m
u
005
·memory chal they
can
tell
a b o ~ t ,
then what
¡hetr
1
ly
be secn
is
how
the narrauons
become
e
ear
th
. . . h
,,.... d more detailed, e
onentauon
w11
more
ª ~ o
the li
s1e
ners lcssens
and th
e physical
n:specl . s bccome s
tronger
.
While
, at the begin
memone
. . he biographers
perhaps
reflect
on how
n1ng
.
1
h · ¡·
¡¡
e going
10
presen1 t eir 1 e story, on
theY harreas in their life they should talk about,
wh1c a · fl
. ffort subsides
as the narrauon
starts
to ow.
th•s e rrators increasingly find themselves in a
The na . . .
arn
of
memories; 1mpre
ss
1ons, 1mages, sen-
sirel and physical feelings, and components
of
sua . ·
r
the
remembered s
1tua11on
come
up
. sorne o
which do not
tit
in
1he1r present
s1tuatt0n
and
which
1hey
have
not t h o u ~ h t about
for a long
time. The narrations' prox1m1ty to past thus
· creases in che course
of
the narrat1on, and per
~ p e c i i v e s
entirely differenl froi:'
the
present per
spective show themselves, wh1ch become clear
in
the argumentation parts
or
also in
the
narrated
aneedoces.
BIOGRAPHICAL CASE
RECONSTRUCTIONS
The principies:
reconstruction and sequentiality
1 developed the biographical case reconstruction
melhod presented here over
many
years in com
bination with various other methods (Rosenthal,
1993 , 1995; Rosenthal and Fischer-Rosenthal ,
2000). 1 -
and
in
the
meantime
many of
my
colleagues• too - work with a combination
ofthe
objective herrneneutics of Ulrich Oevennann
el al. (1979, 1987
7
, the text analysis method
of
Fritz Schütze ( 1983)
and
the
thematic
field
analysis
of
Wolfram
Fischer
( 1982,
prompted
by
Gwwitsch. 1964).
Biognlphic&I cue rcconimictionl
are
charactcnzed -
as
alrcady mcn1ioned - by
tbc
particular anention paid
10
structural differcnces
bctween
what is
cxpcricnccd and
what is
narratcd.
Biographical case rcconstrucuon sharcs tbc
rcconstructivc and sequcntial
approach of othcr
hcrrnencutic mcthods. •Rcconstructive
mcans
that the texl is nol appTOllchcd
with prcdcfined
catcgories - as in contcnl analysis - but rathcr
that
the
meaning
of
individual
passagcs
is intcr
prcted through the ovcrall con1ext
of
thc inter
view.
'Seq
uential'
in
this contexl
means an
approach where the 1ext or small text unit.s
are
interpreted according to their sequential gestalt.
the
scquence of their creation. The analysis
reconstruct.s the progressive creation of an inter
action or the production
of
a spoken or written
text slep
by
step in small analytical un its. In this
method. devclopment
and
testing
of
hypotheses
is based on the abduction p
rocedure
i
ntroduced
by Charles Sander Peirce (Pcirce, 1933/1
980)
where, in contras
to
deduction and induction,
how the hypothesis is generated is
as
importan
as
how il will be tested. 'Peirce's theory of
abduction is
concemed
with the
reasoning which
starts from data and moves towards hypothesis"
(Fann, 1970: 5). According to Peirce, the first
stage
of
nquiry is •
10 adopta
hypothesis
as be ing
suggested
by
the fact' (para. 6,469). The next
stage is '
to
trace
out
its necessary and
probab
le
experimental consequences' (para. 7,203 ) and in
the third stage we test the hypothesis
by compar
ing our predictions with the actual results. Both
scientific theories and everyday theories have a
heuristic value in the development
of
hypothe
ses.
So
unlike in deduction it is
not
a
matter of
following and testi
ng
a particular theory.
lnstead
a range of concepts are taken as possible expla
nations
of
an empirical phenomenon - in other
words for forrning severa possi
ble
hypotheses.
'
The act of
adopting
an
hypothes
is
itself,
at the
instant,
may
seem like a flash
of
insight,
bul
afterwards
it
may
be
sub
jected
to cri
ticism'
(Fann
, 1970: 49).
In other words
: abduction
imposes
on you to
give reasons for
your
sugges
tions and to prove them in the concrete individual
case.
Jus t like deduction
and
induc tion, the method
of abduction comprises three stages of inquiry;
only the order of the stages is different. Whereas
deduction starts with a theory
and
i
nd
uction with
a hypothesis, abduction begins by
examining
an
empirical phenomenon. For a sequential analysis
this
mean
s:
Fmm an empirical phenomenon
lo
ali poss
ible h
ypo
the
ses
.
Starting from an empirical
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
4/9
u,..ri:""'-- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E,..co h. ••oul of n:construl:tion is both . . . . -
1 t e"' - . th b
f ,.
01
pirica mcaning ot past cxpcncncc and e IQ
n
0
1111
O
"h rcsJ'Cd . •lf-pre>ClllallOll
111
thc
prcscnt
lhc ¡ ~ • l i i r
S4
~ 1 ' ' ·J
_.,1 to s1: • "
111
1
-
1
nf( rrt rinciple .
- - ~ ° 1 rulr
1
• ocncrlll p 10) ThlS
r·- ,
11
.,r
•
¡
970
: · rhc
dure
di - uP1"'»111-0 . ¡fano . fcrencc.
The
proce
·1.i tJlC s.
iJ1 facL>
ucuve
in
onlY onc
,.'l.'C)llnt
lh•: ,c1ual ª ~ ; i r u l a t c no•_ 1hat are
IS 1 ' I> 10 ,,,,othcse• . and
.acP
jllll
1h1ni;
11
thC
h,,
.- ·Jerauon
inlP ' .
bUI
a f coOSI
• .w>1hC>I>- ¡' llC O
h1:,:
le
a1
thC .1 hcoorneooo
.
·
esis
or
f"'s>
1
b ¡
1
io th• P ·
1
111 · 11P /1)1 hcnom·
1 1 1 ~ h t c.P
i1Jrt
1i.i w o Follow-uP p ulatcd
fffllll Jiypt
"
nu111e11t1 · ihc forrn -
pn
e
d frorn h •r phenorn
f(J/o
Jcdu.:c
th
..
rule ot
e
Or
pul, are
frorl1
1• his rule.
eo tic.es. 1c.. contirrn t . follow-uP
h y P o ~
ioferrcd
i h a ~ hypothes1sda ' to what
cna
.
for cae d ccor ing s
d
tTcreotlY
·. ns
iderc a . ,
diog prove
1 . IS co . 'f 1h1S rea
h y p < l f . h C ~ I >
·
thC
te.\I.
1
.
me• n e ~ •
111
enipincal
.:o
sible . · v.here .
¡,e plau. ·
1
Th1
S
1.
f inducuve
to
. ·,·al '
· . h
-ensc o
d
The r P
1
. J out in t e • . .
1
nvestigate
· carne case 1>
te>riog is The concrete d d ccd follow-u_
iofcrence. 111a1ch thc e u occdurc
th1s
for i n d i c e ~ ~ º In a sequenual f ~ e s e s are now
..i..-norneo h. 'ollow-up
hyPo
ces
or
thc
1
that t e '' - ·quen
means
'
th 1h
e text
•e of
thern
·teO WI JI W Sorne
C
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
5/9
11ave ver'f
·
1
wi
ll
rand-
5
Jiah>llUC·
1
of
che
11
·1d-
1ifllily bigraphY . ' 11er ch1
. h cti1>
io
. on
che
1
hª duflngh
.. al the
,. 1 ffc>l:i
''"
ea of
1 "
i11oert11 crt
Jcan•·
00
111inll
Jlllihtcf· tl ,..¡¡; ,,,Jd ..
chapter
IO
iJ G, 111' .... ofuolS 1 ·ing
ll
G I
.
Th
s notonl y¡¡;O
graphical relcvancc
for
ama.
1
el
doubt on the cxact rcasons
and
c i r c u m ~ l a J l C ~
. . . thc qu
cs
uo
the judgcmcnt, but also ra1scs
BIOGR PHIC L
RESE RCH
S7
andmother may havc becn convictcd
_ . . ~ t J ¡ c r ~ ~ e n n o r e for Galina this discovery is
ui
1
ust1Y·
F
with the
quesuon
_of
why
th1s past,
a s s o e 1 1 1 t e ~ o
haS major imphcauons for her. ather,
_. 11ich
als k
1
sccret from her. Depcndmg
on
J¡llS
bCen epi Galina idenlifies with her grand-
or
no h . d ' .
whelu... he will
expcrience
t
1s
1scovery m
vcry
f lothcr.
5
So herc
we
retum to the hypothe-
. ot ways. 1 1b d 1 2 S
d1ffere
. •d at the outset ( 1.1
a,
. an .
J.
o
ses o u t h ~
rises as to
whether
shc reacts more
che quesuonlla or
more
critically to
her
gr.md
e f l p a t l l ~ U c ~
~ o r y of persecution,
or
oscillates
f lOther
s
1
15
betwcen the
two
possibilities.
j l J l l b 1 v
l e P i ~ r s h i n g
school,
Galina
studied history
p.ftcr ·me
ofthc
interv1ew
she was
a lecturer
aod at the
~ h e couducted
oral history
interviews
io h1
5
tol)'· p that
had been
suppressed and pcrse
with
ª
g r ~ ~ e fonner
Soviet Un
on.
Here
we can
cuted.
m
for example, that _his also served as a
sunrnse, ay
of dealing
w1th the fam1ly h1story.
rr
ogate w .
su
.
11
ow skip
this analyucal step and pro-
1 WI hn text and thematic field analysis, based
cd to
t e .
ce
rk
of Aron
Gurw1tsch (1964), Wol
fram
on
thhe
w(
0
198
2)
and
Fritz
Schütze
(1983 .
F1sc er
Text
and thematic field analysis
The general goal of ~ i s stage of
1
ana
1
Jysis is
tod
fi
d ut which
mechamsms contro
se
ecuon an
rn º ·zation
and
the
temporal
and thematic link-
orgam
d
1
.
ft h
e text segments. The un er ymg assump-
~
. .
ion is that the narrated
l t f ~
story does not consrst
fa
haphazard senes
of
drs
connected events
;
the
~ a r r a t o r autonomous selection of stories to be
elated is
based on
a
context of meanmg
-
the
~ i o b r r a p h e r overall interpretation. The nanated
life
story thus represents a sequence of mutually
interrelatcd themes, which together form a
dense
nctwork of
intcrconnect
ed
cross-referenccs
(Fischer, J982: 168). In the terminology of Aron
Gurwitsch, the individual
themes
are elements of
a thematic field. While the heme stood in the
'focus of attention , the lh em lic fiel is
'defined
as thc totality
of
those
data, co-present with
the
thcmc,
which are
experienced
as
materially
relevan or pertinent to the theme and form the
background or horizon out
of
which the theme
emerges the
centcr
' (c f.
Gurwitsch
,
1964: 4).
Funhermorc, the textual sort
used
by
the
biog
rapher to present his
analysis
is crucial for
the
analysis.
Thcsc
considerations were
introduced
by Frilz
Schütze
(
1983). Given that
each textual
son is able
to
serve spccific referential and com
municative
functions, onc
can
ask:
why did the
intcrviewee choose this sort of tcxt in this
scqucnce
and not
anothcr sort? The
und
e
rlying
assumption is that
'reality'
docs not imposc:
thc
sort of text a speaker uses, but the
speaker
him
self
or herself
chooses thc sort of tcxt for parti
cular reasons (which
mayor
may not be
known
to
himself/bcrself) .
Thc
working hypothesis is
that
thesc reasons are related to the biographical con
cept, the lived life, and to
the
situation ofrelating
his
account
( including the interviewcr's influ
ence)
in
ways
to be found out
cmpirically.
From
the son of text and the sequential
arrangcmcnt
one
draws conclusions
about
the narrator and
how he/she
wants
to convey the
world
. In
this
analytical
step close
attention
must be paid
to
the
extent to which the selection of textual sort and
also the presented themes are due
to
the proccss
of interaction
between interviewee
and intcr
viewer
.
The
question
of whether the interviewec
is
orientating more on
the
relevance
system
he
/
she
ascribes
to th
c intervicwer or more
to
hislher own biographical relevances is investi
gated sequence
by
sequence.
In preparation for the
analysis
the whole
inter
view te
xt is first
sequentialized, that
is,
briefly
summarized
in
the form
of a list of
separate units
that
are divided up according
to
three criteria
.
The three main criteria to define the beginning/
end
of
a textual sequence are :
• textual sorts
•
thematic shifts
and
changes
• conversational turn-taking
speaker).
(changes of
Among the textual sorts we distinguish
argu
mentation, description, and narration
with
the sub
categories report and single stories. A narration
refers to a cha n of
sequ
ences of events
ofthe
past,
and
they are related to
each other
through a series
of temporal and/or causal links. 'The decisive
feature distinguishing' a
nanation
'from narra
tives is that descriptions prcsent static structures'
(Kallmeyer and Schütze, 1977: 201). An argu
rnentation is a sequence oflines of reasoning, the
orizing and declaration of general ideas. They
show
the narT'dtor' s general orientation and what
he
/
she
thinks
of
himself/herself
and
of
the world.
Let us look now to the first s
equences
of the
sequentialization
of
the intervicw with Galina.
This
sequencing, which is
also
used
as
a kind
of table of
contents for
later analysis,
is now
itself
subjected
to a
sequential analysis.
The
question herc is no
longer
thc biographical sig
nificance
of
an experiencc in the past, but
instead
why the c
xperiencc
is
presented
this
way
and not
otherwise.
In
formulating hypotheses
we orien
tate on the sub-qucstions givcn in the 'Thernatic
Field Analysis' pan
el overleaf.
-----·
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
6/9
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
7/9
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
8/9
TfRfNG
METHO
¡p ¡coúN . . .,.........
r her pcrspect1vcs m the Past .,..
. · " thC
1crrnin
1
º
o b . 1· . 'he
BIOGR PHIC L RESE RCH
63
41 ·e in de ThC rules
significan<
.• us
cd hcnl
· . of its
.•.nlutclY . , .
in
111I
and ihc n ~ e s e e Rosenthal, 2000).
ial • ¡·re o(
rhe
state
(
·iruction we are
fn
lll
tne
f• . ase rccons h
.
..
.
basis
of
our e
d. ' to our researc
On
. · _ acc or 1ng . type
w in a
pos111on
. -
IO constrUCI
a
~ t i o n and this one ~ : S u p e r f i c i a l phenomena
not
only d e s c n b e ~
anitude)
but
also explams
·h
as
an unpohuca 1
ds
10
th1s
presen-
(su
8/9/2019 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research
9/9
G1 4ETH0D
,.rr: ',.. . .
¡¡P4C )l)
Br•-ckncr, D. Kalckm-F1schman
R. - ·' 1h o
· · ·
and1
.
raphies anu " 1v1.v1t
n1
uf E: .
•iclhc:
8
'º c & Sudrich. pp.
115
- 38. 'Pe.
LCS·•·I Gabriclc (2002) Gucst Edit CJ¡i,
.
Rosen •
Or
or
7:
l
'"ami/y: A11 /111.,mationa/ Quur¡ h.
11
.
tht r• . "' .
er/y S
_ Spc:cial 1ssuc: ram1/y Hi.stunc
· -r.
'"h
p,..:ss. ·
- l o, 1
th
• I Gabriclc and Fischcr-Ro.
•le
0
...
. J
Rosen • • SCnth ' l •
()()O)
•
Analysc narrativ-biographisc'- at, W
¡
,
2
K 'I ot
r
U. flick.
E.
v ~ n a r d ~ r f f and l. S ~ ~ ; •
Qualita/ive Fcm: The
Cul tura/
p
.
d L
. N H
o/w
¡..._
Under.>tandmg.
cw avcn:
Yalc
Univc .'
' f.,.
Schuctz. Alfrcd (1962) 'Common-scnsc
"" )>
p
1
es;>1¡
. tcrprctation
of
human action', in • ªlid
' V 1 1 "lfrcd .
,r.,
Collected Paper>. o . · Thc Haguc : Nijho
S . , ~
SchützC, Fritz (1976) 'Zur Hcrvorlockun lf.
n Ertahlungcn thcmatisch relevante Gg und
vo r Csch · n,
R
-•mcn soziologischcr Fcldforschunu• .
"" . " •
n
,0.rbe¡
Biclcfcldcr Soz1ologcn, Kommunilcative ,._ . is... ·
. . . 159- 260
' ••lj
.
Mumch : Fink,
PP·
• . · . ' > < ~
Schützc. Fritz (1983) 8 1 ~ g r a p h 1 c f o r s c h u n g Und
lntcrvicw', Neue Prwm 3: 283- 93 . l l a r t
Scalc, Clivc
(
1999) Thc Quulity of
Qua/itutive
London : Sagc.
Tho
mas William
l
and Znaniccki Flori•·
' . '
09SK
Poli>h
Peasa111
Eumpe
u11d
America
2
) n .
•d
). Champaign, IL: Univcrsity
of
111
•ols
(li¡¡
e · . .
•n
o1s p
(rcprint ofthc 2nd cdtt1on
of
1928, originall
1
'tlt
Thompson, Paul (1992) The Voice o f the
yp
91
Klo
ffistury.
Ncw York: Cambridge Univ
crsity
p:'
·
V
x11cr Bcttina (2002) Judentum und Kon ss
•
u
u
utsche Familiengeschichlen in drei
Gen
.
erut1
lf i
Opladcn: Lcskc & Budrich. ·
4
ocus
groups
Phil
acnaghten
and
Greg
yers
ten years ago, an academic
As r e c e n : l ~ a : ~ o explain, define and justify. he
r c s e a r c ~ e
odd research practtce of gettmg etght
5
cen11ngly
1
. a room and making them talk for
pe
op e m
or so · g tape-recorder; now everyone,
an ove rhean
dn
non-academic alike, thinks they
d
m1c an .
h
aca e ,. cus groups are.
focus
groups ave
w what
10
· · 1 d f k
kn° the spcc
1al1
st know e ge o mar et
gone
from and a few innovative acadcmic
re
searcher
s.
n such ficlds as cultural studies and
rcsearchelrsyt to wide public notoricty, the topic
'al po te , .
soc
t . · n documentanes and the butt
of
com-
of
elev1s10
f; · • d ,,.
bo
ut
'focus group asctsm an
1ocu
s
r n e n L ~ ª 1 · 1 d · 1
· • in imagc-obsessed po 1t1ca an socia
g
roupies h 1 'd d
. ·
1
·
ns But focus groups ave a so prov1 e
insUIU tO · . . .
da
ta
for
hi
ghly intluenual stud1es m rangc
of
social scienccs ( c.g., Morley, 1980'.
.B
urgess
1 l988a· Licbes and Katz, 1990; L1vmgstone
~ ~ ~ Lunt, 1994; Millcr et al., 1998; Wodak et al.,
1999).
The rapid spread of focus ?roups corresponds
to a ncw interest, in many social sc1cnce fields, m
shar
ed
and tacit beliefs, and m the way these
beliefs emerge in intcraction with others in a
local setting.
Thcy
are
often
used in an
exploratory way, when rescarchers are not
entire
ly
sure what categories, links and perspec
tives are relevan . For instance, surveys ofpublic
opinion on environmental problems assume that
people agree on what constitutes the environ
ment,
what the problems are, and their relations
to these problems. Focus groups
on
environmen
tal issues are likely to revea( complex, contradic
tory
and shifting definitions, and different senses
of agency.
Of course other qualitative methods might
also be used for this exploration.
Et
hnographies
can revea more about the non-disc ursive every
day
practices that define
an
issue
(Agar
and
MacDonald, 1995), but they do not necessarily
bring out what
is
not said because it nccd not be
said in this community. One-to-one interviews
are more likely to allow for extended narratives,
and for more open talk where there are issues
of
status, contlict and self-presentation (Michell,
1999). But thcy can also put a grcat deal of pres
sure on the relation bctwcen interviewer and
interviewec; the interviewee can wondcr just
whom they are talking to. A group can provide
prompts to talk, correcting
or
responding to
others, and a plausible audience for that talk that
is not just the researchcr. So focus groups work
best for topics people could talk about to each
other in their everyday lives - but don't.
Focus group methods have been set out in a
variety ofhandbooks and introductions (Morgan,
1988; Krueger, 1994; Kitzinger, 1995; Morgan
and Krueger, 1998; Wilkinson, 1999), and the
classic study by the originators
of
he method has
been reprinted (Merton et al., 1956). Useful short
introductions by one
of
the most innovative
of
focus group researchers are now available on the
web (Kitzinger, 1995). There has been an assess
ment
of
the role
of
focus groups in the develop
ment
of
one field, media studies (Morrison,
1998),
anda
collection
of
essays dealing not just
with the practicalities, but with methodological
and theoretical issues, and especially with rela
tions between the researcher and the participants
in the groups (Barbour a nd Kitzinger, 1999). A
study by Puchta and Potter (2003) applies work
in conversation analysis and discursive psycho
logy to provide a detailed analysis of interaction
from the perspective
of
the moderator
of
rnarket
research groups. And at last, there is a thoughtful
handbook for social science researchers that does
more than just give rules, advice and moral sup
port (Bloor et al., 2001 ). So we will not give yet
another general introduction to how to do focus
b'TOups. lnstead we would like to focus on just