TY - JOUR
T1 - Expanding the Political Psychology Toolkit
T2 - The Potential of Discursive Psychology for Understanding Contentious Political Debate at a Grassroots Level
AU - Clark, Shannon J.
AU - Botterill, Linda Courtenay
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 International Society of Political Psychology
PY - 2018/6
Y1 - 2018/6
N2 - In its location at the intersection of political science and psychology, political psychology draws on many of the research techniques of both disciplines in its exploration of power, voting behavior, leadership, attitudes, and values. One hitherto relatively underutilized approach for understanding public policy debate is discursive psychology (DP). Applying this perspective to a contentious policy issue in Australia, we seek to demonstrate that this approach can add richness and depth to our understanding of how ordinary citizens engage in public policy debates. We suggest that this type of analysis can augment insights obtained from more traditional methods—such as focus groups, experimental approaches, and opinion polling—by analyzing how debates are constructed and presented at the grassroots level. This research is innovative in two ways. First, it applies a rigorous, empirical research approach to an area in which it has not previously been used: the study of public policy issues. Second, rather than analyzing the communicative practices of political leaders, we consider the rhetorical arguments made by ordinary citizens in their engagement with political issues and how they negotiate what counts as evidence. This can provide insights into how public debate can be conducted more productively and respectfully.
AB - In its location at the intersection of political science and psychology, political psychology draws on many of the research techniques of both disciplines in its exploration of power, voting behavior, leadership, attitudes, and values. One hitherto relatively underutilized approach for understanding public policy debate is discursive psychology (DP). Applying this perspective to a contentious policy issue in Australia, we seek to demonstrate that this approach can add richness and depth to our understanding of how ordinary citizens engage in public policy debates. We suggest that this type of analysis can augment insights obtained from more traditional methods—such as focus groups, experimental approaches, and opinion polling—by analyzing how debates are constructed and presented at the grassroots level. This research is innovative in two ways. First, it applies a rigorous, empirical research approach to an area in which it has not previously been used: the study of public policy issues. Second, rather than analyzing the communicative practices of political leaders, we consider the rhetorical arguments made by ordinary citizens in their engagement with political issues and how they negotiate what counts as evidence. This can provide insights into how public debate can be conducted more productively and respectfully.
KW - Australia
KW - discursive psychology
KW - public policy
KW - wind farms
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028804118&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/pops.12443
DO - 10.1111/pops.12443
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85028804118
SN - 0162-895X
VL - 39
SP - 667
EP - 683
JO - Political Psychology
JF - Political Psychology
IS - 3
ER -