4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research

download 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research

of 9

Transcript of 4_Rosenthal. Biographical Research

  • 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