Below is a presentation of analytical frameworks and methods that I primarily use in my research.
Analytical frameworks – interactional frame analysis
I work with frame analysis as analytical framework. The literature on frame analysis argue that when we make meaning of the world around us, we make use of often unconscious structures, so-called frames. Frame analysis therefore argues that we cannot talk about environmental issues, such as climate change, but to frame it in any way.
Frame analysis also emphasizes the relationship between perceptions and actions and suggests that frames guide actions through the promotion of a particular problem definition and solution recommendation. I analyze the relationship between perceptions of problem definition and solutions by critically examine various arguments and assumptions as well as their formation.
Furthermore, frame analysis speaks of credibility to understand why some frames resonates with a particular audience while others don´t. Frame analysis suggests that frame resonance depends partly on frame consistency, credibility of knowledge production and credibility of information source. My research involves analyzing credibility and the joint construction of credibility.
I adopts a dialogical perspective on sense-making which also means a dialogical perspective on framing processes. Dialogism assume that meaning is created in interaction and thus, I view sense-making processes as dynamic. Frame analysis tends to be static while serving the purpose of that an issue can be understood in many different ways and from different angles. The dialogic frame analysis emphasizes the role of interaction in the construction of meaning and emphasizes process rather than perspective. Thus, I focus in my research not only on different frames, but also on how they are formed.
To gain insight into how people understand and relate to environmental issues, I work mainly with focus group material. Focus groups are a method that enables the exchange of ideas, thoughts and experiences between participants. One of the challenges as moderator is to create conditions for fruitful discussions - both for participants and for me as a researcher. Overall, I see that qualitative approaches allow for a contextual understanding of different views and therefore, I also conduct qualitative studies of media content as well as qualitative interviews. My analysis is aimed at both the spoken and the unspoken. To study the explicit statements I use thematic content analysis with a focus on recurring themes in the material. To identify implicit statements such as frames and how they formed, I analyze different framing devices, or communication tools, such as metaphors, analogies and distinctions (prototypical) example.