Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Karl Mannheim' keyword pg.1 of 1
08 OCTOBER 2017

Understanding through Pictures versus an Understanding about Pictures

"When developing qualitative methods for the interpretation of pictures, it seems to be important not to explain pictures by texts, but to differentiate them from texts. Nevertheless, it seems equally important to develop common standards or methodological devices which are relevant for the interpretation of texts, as well as for the interpretation of pictures. Examples of common standards are: to treat the text as well as the picture as a self-referential system, to differentiate between explicit and implicit (atheoretical) knowledge, to change the analytic stance from the question What to the question How, to reconstruct the formal structures of texts as well as pictures in order to integrate single elements into the over-all context, and—last but not least—to use comparative analysis. The application or realization of these common standards and methodological devices in the field of the interpretation of pictures, however, has to be quite different from that of the interpretation of texts, if we intend to advance to iconicity as a self-contained domain, to its inherent laws and to its autonomy independent from texts."

(Ralf Bohnsack, 2008)

Volume 9, No. 3, Art. 26 – September 2008, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research.

TAGS

Alfred Schutz • analytic mentality • atheoretical knowledge • Bildlichkeit • Charles Goodwin • communicative knowledge • comparative analysis • conjunctive knowledge • conversational analysis • cultural phenomena • documentary meaning • Documentary Method of Interpretation • empirical social sciences • Erving Goffman • Erwin Panofsky • ethnomethodology • formal compositional structure • Forum Qualitative Social Research • Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung • FQS • Gottfried Boehm • Hans Belting • Harold GarfinkelHarvey Sacks • hyper-ritualization • iconic meaning • iconicityiconography • iconology • image-based understanding • immanent meaning • interpretative methods • Karl MannheimKarl Popper • linguistic turn • literal meaning • Martin Heidegger • Max Imdahl • meaning image-based depictions • Niklas Luhmann • Peter BergerPierre Bourdieuplanimetric composition • Praxeological Sociology of Knowledge • qualitative methodsqualitative research • Ralf Bohnsack • research practiceRoland Barthes • self-referential systems • semantic structure • semiotics • sequence analysis • simultaneitysocial phenomenasocial realitysociologysociology of knowledgetacit knowledge • text interpretation • theory of action • Thomas Luckmann • transcontrariness • typification • Umberto Ecovideo analysis • visible phenomena

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
21 FEBRUARY 2013

The Social Constructivist Worldview

"Social constructivism (often combined with interpretivism; see Mertens, 1998) is such a perspective, and it is typically seen as an approach to qualitative research. The ideas came from Mannheim and from works such as Berger and Luekmann's (1967) The Social Construction of Reality and Lincoln and Guba's (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. More recent writers who have summarized this position are Lincoln and Guba (2000), Schwandt (2007), Neuman (2000), and Crotty (1998), among others. Social constructivists hold assumptions that individuals seek understanding of the world in which they live and work. Individuals develop subjective meanings of their experiences – meanings directed toward certain objects or things. These meanings are varied and multiple, leading the researcher to look for the complexity of views rather than narrowing meanings into a few categories or ideas. The goal of the research is to rely as much as possible on the participants' views of the situation being studied. The questions become broad and general so that the participants can construct the meaning of a situation, typically forged in discussions or interactions with other persons. The more open–ended the questioning, the better, as the researcher listens carefully to what people say or do in their life settings. Often these subjective meanings are negotiated socially and historically. They are not simply imprinted on individuals but are formed through interaction with others (hence social constructivism) and through historical and cultural norms that operate in individuals' lives. Thus, constructivist researchers often address the processes of interaction among individuals. They also focus on the specific contexts in which people live and work, in order to understand the historical and cultural settings of the participants. Researchers recognize that their own backgrounds shape their interpretation, and they position themselves in the research to acknowledge how their interpretation flows from their personal, cultural, and historical experiences. The researcher's intent is to make sense of (or interpret) the meanings others have about the world. Rather than starting with a theory (as in postpostivism), inquirers generate or inductively develop a theory or pattern of meaning."

(John Creswell, 2003)

John Creswell (2003). "Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches". (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

TAGS

complexity of views • constructivist researcher • cultural experiences • Donna Mertens • Egon Guba • historical and cultural norms • historical and cultural settings • historical experiences • imprinted on individuals • interaction among individuals • interaction with othersinterpret meaningsinterpretationinterpretivismJohn CreswellKarl Mannheim • life contexts • life settings • Michael Crottyopen-ended questioningopen-ended questions • pattern of meaning • Peter Berger • postpostivism • qualitative researchsocial constructivismsocial science • subjective meanings • theory of meaning • Thomas Luckmann • Thomas Schwandt • William Neuman • work contextsYvonna Lincoln

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.