{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019945602901178604, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001813236627379873, 'mean_word_length': 5.814814814814815, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Critical discourse analysis and critical qualitative inquiry: data analysis strategies for enhanced understanding of inference and meaning

Abstract This manuscript describes an approach to critical qualitative data analysis that combines (1) Carspecken’s critical qualitative methodological framework with (2) the conceptual resources of critical discourse analysis (CDA), as framed by Fairclough and colleagues. Carspecken’s methodological theory illuminates the connection between sociopolitical power and culture by introducing the content of validity claims into analysis of discourse. In turn, CDA helps to support the analysis of validity claims in that these are often expressed or legitimated through implicit references, and through the rhetoric, shape, or tone of what is being said. After an introduction of key concepts, I outline the combined approach and present an example, illustrating steps from coding to reconstructive analyses to CDA memos. I conclude with a discussion of the kinds of findings that can be supported by this analytical method, and implications for further research.