Cultural ResearchCultural Research

Developing a Critical AppreciationDeveloping a Critical Appreciation

What is (academic) research?

• Academic research is investigative work carried out according to agreed procedures whose objective is the production and dissemination of new knowledge

What is research?• Academic (critical) research differs from

commissioned (administrative) research in many ways

• Its aim is to increase understanding rather than, for example, efficiency, profitability and the like, though these are not, of course, incompatible

What is research?• Academic research is sometimes

criticised by outsiders as “airy fairy”. Such criticisms, however, tend to express dissatisfaction with a commitment to a broader (social/understanding-oriented) rather than a narrower (company/problem-oriented) perspective

I think, therefore…• Research is not about opinions,

hunches or intuitions, no matter how much experience these are based on: it is about evidence

• The evidence must be gathered in ways that the academic community accepts as valid

The Research Process• In addition, academic research requires

the researcher to show an awareness of research already carried out in the field (to avoid reinventing the wheel or replicating already existing insights)

• There is no need whatsoever to agree with the conclusions of previous studies

The Research Process• Once evidence has been gathered it

must be analysed and interpreted

• Various frameworks exist for analysis and interpretation - it is important to be clear about which is/are being used, and why

The Research Process• Once conclusions have been generated

the process must be written up in a clear and coherent narrative (academic writing, like most forms of writing, is essentially a form of story-telling)

The Research Process• The report, and the knowledge it

contains, must then be disseminated– At conferences or symposia– As articles or chapters– As a book, and so on

• The more rigorous the peer-review, the more prestigious the dissemination

The Research Process• The key steps are, then

– Defining an object– Doing a literature search– Adopting a methodology– Gathering evidence– Analysing the evidence and generating

conclusions

The Research Process• The key steps are, then

– Writing up a report– Disseminating the results

The Research Process• These steps must all be integrated

within a coherent research philosophy which renders each of them compatible with all the others

Critiquing Research• Research can be critiqued at any point

in the process

• Robust research is clear about its philosophical and methodological choices, internally coherent, and clearly explained

Some examplesSome examples

Let’s cut all that airy-fairy stuff and Let’s cut all that airy-fairy stuff and look at some examples…look at some examples…

The Barcelona OlympicsThe Barcelona Olympics

The Opening Ceremony

A famous shot

Catalan nationalism

One nation, the Catalan CountriesOne language, Catalan

Catalan nationalism

Catalan nationalism

We are a nation and have the right to decide

The Project• In 1992 I decided to research media

coverage of the Barcelona Olympics as part of a much larger study of the relationship between sport and national identity

• Since I was interested in the “stateless nation” problematic, I decided to concentrate on the Spanish and Catalan media

The Project• Since my focus was on national identity, I did

not analyse either the economic or the organisational dimensions of the games or of their media coverage, though both of these did impinge to some extent on my analysis

Philosophical framework• I had to decide whether my analysis would

be located within a positivist (i.e. broadly quantitative) or a social-constructionist paradigm

• Since I have seldom (if ever) seen quantitative approaches which I found useful, while I have often found social constructionist approaches highly productive, this was an easy decision to take

Philosophical framework• As a result, I did no quantitative analyses at

all (though I should add that these are, of course, possible), as a result of which my analysis claims neither the “scientificity” nor the “generalisability” which quantitative approaches often claim

• It was none the less located in an academically entirely “respectable” paradigm

Literature Review• Despite the obvious importance of

Olympic Games from a wide range of perspectives, there was very little academic literature on them (sport only became a respectable topic of academic analysis in the late eighties/early nineties)

Literature Review• There was, however, a growing body of

academic work on national identity, which I did read. As always, some parts of this were of more use to me than others. In particular I found modernist/essentialist approaches - the view that nations do indeed exist - particularly frustrating

Literature Review• In order to carry out the project

successfully, I also undertook a considerable amount of reading in relation to the history of Catalan nationalism, and of Spain more generally

Method• Since I was interested in the links

between sport and other areas of social life (in particular the concept of national identity) I choose Discourse Analysis as an analytical tool

Method• Had my object of study been different -

for example, had I chosen to concentrate on the fan experience - DA would still have been available to me as a tool, but would have had to be combined with other ethnographic methods such as interviews or focus groups

Method• DA is absolutely incompatible with

quantitative approaches such as Content Analysis, since within this framework a single word appearing once but energising a powerful discourse will have a greater impact than another word appearing a hundred times but energising a weak discourse

Discourse Analysis• Since DA starts from the assumption

that meaning does not lie in texts, but in the discourses (large-scale social narratives) which these refer to, I was automatically committed to reading a very large number of newspaper articles

The evidence• I read every issue of a dozen Spanish

newspapers (both national and regional) for the two weeks prior to the Olympics and for the entire duration of the Games

The analysis• I was able to isolate three constantly

recurring discourses:– A unitarian discourse– A differential discourse– A disjunctive discourse

• I complemented this with an analysis of a small amount of television coverage

The conclusion• While Olympic Games are officially

about sport, from a broader perspective they are appropriated for a wide range of political motives

• They become an “object” over which a range of political projects compete

The conclusion• This struggle is extremely unequal, since

resources are distributed very unevenly among the competing parties

• In this instance the “unitarian” discourse was the most widely reproduced

• It dominated not only press but above all television coverage, often in very subtle ways

The conclusion• For example by focussing constantly on the

Spanish flag, even when Catalan flags were more numerous in the stadium

• Or by constantly replaying images of King Juan Carlos, monarch of Spain rather than of Catalonia

King Juan Carlos

A constant feature of television coverage of the Games

Dissemination• The results were disseminated at

conferences in the UK and Spain, and in the form of journal articles and as part of book (Sport and National Identity in the European Media)

Critique • People working in the positivist paradigm

would criticise the analysis for its lack of a quantitative basis and for its non-generalisability to other events

• Non-generalisability is a critique I accept in advance, though some of the broader conclusions are of course generalisable

Critique • Along with this presentation and podcast you

will find my own article, and another located much more in a quantitative framework

• Both, I hope you will agree, produce knowledge, though it is very different kinds of knowledge

Critique • Each is open to critique• A radical critique would critique each for the

failings of the paradigm within which it is located

• A more targeted critique would critique them for any detectable failures to meet the standards of the paradigm within which they have placed themselves

Critique • Have a read at both, and offer whatever level

of critique you think appropriate• Believe it or not, I am always happy to

receive critiques of my own work - in the final analysis progress is only possible through a process of critique.

Many thanksMany thanks