Difference between revisions of "Nikander2009"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Pirjo Nikander; |Title=Doing change and continuity: age identity and the micro–macro divide |Tag(s)=EMCA; Discursive Psychology; Inter...")
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Pirjo Nikander;
 
|Author(s)=Pirjo Nikander;
 
|Title=Doing change and continuity: age identity and the micro–macro divide
 
|Title=Doing change and continuity: age identity and the micro–macro divide
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Discursive Psychology; Interviews; Identity;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Discursive Psychology; Interviews; Identity;
 
|Key=Nikander2009
 
|Key=Nikander2009
 
|Year=2009
 
|Year=2009
 +
|Language=English
 
|Journal=Ageing & Society
 
|Journal=Ageing & Society
 
|Volume=29
 
|Volume=29

Revision as of 16:43, 16 October 2017

Nikander2009
BibType ARTICLE
Key Nikander2009
Author(s) Pirjo Nikander
Title Doing change and continuity: age identity and the micro–macro divide
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Discursive Psychology, Interviews, Identity
Publisher
Year 2009
Language English
City
Month
Journal Ageing & Society
Volume 29
Number 6
Pages 863-881
URL Link
DOI 10.1017/S0144686X09008873
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This paper is a study of the discursive management of notions of change and continuity in interview talk. It presents selected short empirical examples from interviews with 22 Finnish baby-boomers, and discusses the methodological and theoretical issues that arise. Following a review of the major approaches to the study of age identity, the analytic intersection between qualitative gerontology and discursive psychology is explored. The analysis identifies how the frequent use of a ‘provisional continuity device’ enables speakers simultaneously both to acknowledge and to distance themselves from factual notions of physical or psychological lifespan change. The key methodological argument is that the discursive analysis of age-in-interaction cannot necessarily be achieved through the myopic micro-study of discursive strategies, but rather two suggestions are made. First, it is argued that analytically-anchored and rigorous discursive gerontology that both systematically draws on and contributes to the broad field of discursive research provides a means by which to test empirically post-modern conceptualisations of age identity. Second, it is suggested that analyses of age-talk in everyday and institutional settings provide an analytical and theoretical middle-ground between the macro versus micro or ‘microfication’ debate in gerontology.

Notes