![]() ![]() Several dialectical scholars have argued that communication rituals exemplify integration practices (e.g., Braithwaite, Baxter, and Harper 1998). Given that the poles negate each other, this practice is a complex one. The next practice, integration, involves a complete instead of a partial response to both dialectical poles at the same time. Such a compromise would be neither fully open nor fully closed but somewhere in the middle. For example, family members struggling with the dialectic of expression-nonexpression might compromise by revealing partial, not full, truths to one another. When parties enact balance, they basically strive for a compromise response that is, a response in which both dialectical poles are fulfilled but only partially. Both spiraling inversion and segmentation allow a relationship pair to move back and forth between oppositions, but in different ways.Īlthough it is less common for relationship parties to be responsive to both dialectical poles simultaneously, three communication practices have been identified to accomplish this both/and simultaneity. The long-distance couple may decide that Monday through Friday are the days in which their individual lives will take priority, whereas Saturday and Sunday are the days in which their relationship will take priority. In enacting segmentation, relationship parties negotiate by topic or activity domain, agreeing that in domain A one dialectical pole will be emphasized whereas in domain B the other dialectical pole will be emphasized. For example, a long-distance marital couple trying to negotiate the dialectic of integration and separation could alternate their week-ends between those spent together and those spent apart. In enacting spiraling inversion, relationship parties tack back and forth through time, alternating an emphasis first on one dialectical pole and then on the other dialectical pole. 117-136Ībout this article at including a link to the official electronic version.Because of the helical pattern that frequently characterizes dialectical change, it is not surprising that researchers have found two dominant communication practices in the negotiation of contradiction. (2010) Toward a dialectic relation between the results in CSCL: Three critical methodological aspects of content analysis schemes. Keywords: CSCL, Content analysis, Critical methodological decisions, DialecticsĬitation: Clarà, M. Indicators regarding these aspects are proposed and defined, and their use for facilitating dialectical relations between results is exemplified by means of the examination of five specific approaches. We consider three critical methodological aspects in content analysis schemes: the units of analysis, the relations to be established, and the dimensions of analysis. These indicators come from what we term “critical methodological aspects”: those aspects of the methodological infrastructure that are directly related to theoretical positions. ![]() In the present paper, we propose a set of indicators, applicable to content analysis approaches, aimed to facilitate this reciprocal positioning of the results in the field. We propose that the main reason for this problem is not the theoretical and methodological diversity itself, but rather the difficulty of situating one specific result within this diversity in a way that makes dialectic relations between results visible and mutual transformation of the approaches possible. The paper addresses this problem from a dialectic view. This diversity complicates the articulation of the knowledge that is produced within this investigative framework. ![]() Toward a dialectic relation between the results in CSCL: Three critical methodological aspects of content analysis schemesĪbstract: The research field of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) includes a large variety of approaches which present significant theoretical and methodological differences. Return to Journal Contents Article of Volume 5, Issue 1, March 2010 ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |