Epistemology, methodology and content analysis techniques

Authors

  • José Luis Piñuel Raigada Universidad Complutense de Madrid Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v3i1.1

Keywords:

content analysis, communication theory, epistemology of knowledge, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics

Abstract

It is exposed, first, an epistemological review of the analysis of content, as scientific practice in social sciences that studies an object (v.g. a singular communication) for whose representation (scientific and refutable therefore) it is used the selection procedure and analysis of communicative products that belong objectively to that communication that are significant to know it from a theoretical perspective, and that they are valid or pertinent to put on approval the conditions, so much general as matters, for those that these communicative products have been elaborated, or that they can be it, in any communication type similar to the one that has produced them. In second place the method is examined (the procedure rules) that aspires to tie in a valid way the succession of performances that concern to the selection of the corpus, to its segmentation in analysis units and to its exam to elaborate, to register and to treat data of diverse logical orders, thanks to which it is elaborated a speeches able to represent scientifically (or in a refutable way) to the study object that is not the own corpus, but the human practice that has engendered the material object of the analysis: the analyzed communicative product. In third place, the last section exposes the technical alternatives that underlie to any analysis procedure, so much if it is carried out in all its steps by the investigators and analysts, as if it is carried out automatically by the available resources of software, and shortly described following the work of Harald Klein.

References

Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Nueva York: The Free Press.

Eco, U. (1975). La estructura ausente. Barcelona: Lumen. [Edición original italiana, 1968].

Gaitán, J.A. (1991). Historia, comunicación y reproducción social en la transición española. Análisis de las expresiones generales y universales de la representación del acontecer en un diario de re fe rencia dominante: El País, 1976, 1981. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

Gaitán, J.A. & J.L. Piñuel Raigada (1997). Técnicas de investigación social. Elaboración y registro de datos. Madrid: Síntesis.

George, A.L. (1959). Propaganda analysis: A study of infe rences made from Nazi propaganda in World War II. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.

Hall, E.T. (1973). La dimensión oculta. Enfoque antropológico del uso del espacio. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios de.Administración Local. [Edición original: (1966). The hidden dimension. Nueva York: Doubleday & C].

Holsti, O.R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. MA: Reading Addison-Wesley.

Ibáñez, J. (1986). Más allá de la sociología. Madrid: Siglo XXI.

Klein, H. Text Analysis Info Page. URL: http://www.textanalysis.info/html

Lasswell, H. (1965). “Why be quantitative?”. In H. Lasswell & N. Leites (comps.), Language of politics. Cambridge: MIT Press, 142-44.

Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. Nueva York: Macmillan.

Martín Serrano, M. (1989). La producción social de comunicación. Madrid: Alianza Universidad.

Martín Serrano, M. et al. (1981). Epistemología de la comunicación y análisis de la referencia. Madrid: Visor.

Piñuel Raigada, J.L. (1989). La expresión. Una introducción a la filosofía de la comunicación. Madrid: Visor.

Piñuel Raigada, J.L. (1993). Cultura política y TV en la transición en Chile. Madrid: C.E.D.E.A.L.

Piñuel Raigada, J.L. & J.A. Gaitán (1995). Metodología general. Conocimiento científico e investigación en la comunicación social. Madrid: Síntesis.

Piñuel Raigada, J.L. y J.I. García-Lomas (2001). “Autopoiesis y comunicación”. Research Group nº 51 (ISA), III Congreso Internacional de Sociocibernética. León, Guanajuato (México), 26-30 junio 2001.

Pool, I. de S. (1959). Trend in content analysis. Urbana, IL.: University of Illinois.

Rapoport, A. (1969). Hous form and culture. Nueva York: Prentice Hall.

Todorov, T. (1982). “Las categorías del relato literario”. In VV.AA., Análisis estructural del relato. Buenos Aires: Ediciones B. [Texto original, 1966].

Published

2002-04-01

How to Cite

Raigada, J. L. P. (2002). Epistemology, methodology and content analysis techniques. Sociolinguistic Studies, 3(1), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v3i1.1