Cover not available
Part of
Responses to Language Varieties: Variability, processes and outcomes
Edited by Alexei Prikhodkine and Dennis R. Preston
[IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society 39] 2015
► pp. 55–84

Mixing methods in the study of language attitudes

Theory and application

| University of Vienna
Mixed methods research (MMR) is currently on the rise in the social sciences. This paper provides a theoretical discussion and a practical illustration of MMR in the social psychological study of language attitudes. First, I review perceived obstacles to MMR - in particular, the ‘incompatibility thesis’, whereby quantitative and qualitative methods are assumed to clash epistemologically. I propose an alternative account by which qual and quan research on language attitudes can be integrated on a common theoretical basis that holds attitudes to constitute interactionally processed ‘human epistemological constructs’ (HECs). I apply this approach in MMR on Austrian German, where I integrate a qual analysis of language-attitudinal HECs found in discourse data with a quan speaker evaluation experiment designed to corroborate the qual exegesis.
Published online: 16 December 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.39.03sou
References (88)
References
Ajzen, Icek & Fishbein, Martin. 2005. The influence of attitudes on behavior. In The Handbook of Attitudes, Dolores Albarracín, Blair T. Johnson & Mark P. Zanna (eds), 173-221. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Arendt, Birte. 2011. Laientheoretische Konzeptionen von Sprache und Dialekt am Beispiel des Niederdeutschen: Eine kontextsensitive Analyse von Spracheinstellungsäußerungen sowie ihre methodologische Fundierung Niederdeutsches Wort: Beiträge zur niederdeutschen Philologie 51: 133-162.Google Scholar
Aron, Arthur, Aron, Elaine N. & Coups, Elliot J. 2009. Statistics for Psychology, 5th edn. Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1986[1952-53]. The problem of speech genres. In Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, Vern W. McGee (transl.), Caryl Emerson & Michael Holquist (eds), 60-102. Austin TX: The University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Baumann, Richard. 1992. Performance. In Folklore, Cultural Performances, and Popular Entertainments, Richard Baumann (ed.), 41-49. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Becker, Alton L. 1995. Beyond Translation. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Bergmann, Manfred M. (ed.). 2008. Advances in Mixed Methods Research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Bhaskar, Roy. 1989. Reclaiming Reality: A Critical Introduction to Contemporary Philosophy. London: Verso.Google Scholar
. 1991. Philosophy and the Idea of Freedom. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1997. A Realist Theory of Science. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan. 2005. Discourse. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryman, Alan. 2006. Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research 6(1): 97-113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1): 8-22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Deborah. 2001. Working with Spoken Discourse. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Coupland, Nik. 2007. Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creswell, John W. 2011. Controversies in mixed methods research. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (eds), 269-283. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
. 2014. Die Entwicklung der Mixed-Methods-Forschung. In Introduction to Mixed Methods, Udo Kuckartz (ed.), 13-26. Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
Creswell, John W. & Plano Clark, Vicki L. 2011. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, John W. & Zhang, Wanqing. 2009. The application of mixed methods designs to trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress 22(6): 612-621.Google Scholar
Denzin, Norman K. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. 2011. Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (eds), 1-19. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Zoltan. 2007. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Wodak, Ruth. 1982. Sociophonological methods in the study of sociolinguistic variation in Viennese German. Language in Society 2: 339-370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eagly, Alice H. & Chaiken, Shelly. 2005. Attitude research in the 21st century: The current state of knowledge. In The Handbook of Attitudes, Dolores Albarracín, Blair T. Johnson & Mark P. Zanna (eds), 743-767. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Ebner, Jakob. 2008. Duden – Österreichisches Deutsch. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2008. Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(4): 453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erickson, Frederick. 1986. Listening and speaking. In Languages and Linguistics, Deborah Tannen & James E. Alatis (eds), 294-319. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Garrett, Peter, Coupland, Nik & Williams, Angie. 1999. Evaluating dialect in discourse: Teachers’ and teenagers’ responses to young English speakers in Wales. Language in Society 28: 321-354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gee, James Paul. 1999. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gergen, Kenneth J. 2008. On the very idea of social psychology. Social Psychology Quarterly 71(4): 331–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giles, Howard & Coupland, Nik. 1991. Language: Contexts and Consequences. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Giles, Howard & Bouchard Ryan, Ellen. 1982. Prolegomena for developing a social psychological theory of language attitudes. In Attitudes Towards Language Variation, Ellen Bouchard Ryan & Howard Giles (eds), 208-223. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
. 1974. Frame Analysis. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. 1982. Discourse strategies. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelfarb, Samuel. 1993. The measurement of attitudes. In The Psychology of Attitudes, Alice H. Eagly & Shelly Chaiken (eds), 23-87. Fort Worth TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Howe, Kenneth R. 2003. Closing Methodological Divides. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Huber, Oswald. 2013. Das psychologische Experiment, 6th edn. Bern: Hans Huber.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell. 1972. Models of the interaction of language and social life. In Directions in Sociolinguistics, John J. Gumperz & Dell Hymes (eds), 35-71. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,Google Scholar
Hyrkstedt, Irene & Kalaja, Paula. 1998. Attitudes toward English and its functions in Finland: A discourse-analytic study. World Englishes 17(3): 359-368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, Barbara & Kiesling, Scott F. 2008. Indexicality and experience: Exploring the meanings of /aw/-monophthongization in Pittsburgh. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(1): 5–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Imtraud & Ender, Andrea. 2013. Diglossia or dialect–standard continuum in speakers’ awareness and usage: On the categorisation of lectal variation in Austria. In Variation in Language and Language Use, Monika Reif, Justyna A. Robinson & Martin Pütz (eds), 273-298. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kristeva, Julia. 1986[1966]. Word, dialog and novel. In The Kristeva Reader, Toril Moi (ed.), 34-61. New York NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Korzybski, Alfred. 1994[1933]. A non-Aristotelian system and its necessity for rigour in mathematics and physics. In Science and Sanity, 5th edn, 747-761. Fort Worth TX: Institute of General Semantics.Google Scholar
Kuckartz, Udo. 2014. Mixed Methods. Wiesbaden: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lambert, Wallace E., Hodgson, Richard, Gardner, Robert C. & Fillenbaum, Samuel. 1960. Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60(1): 44-51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaPiere, Richard T. 1934. Attitudes vs. actions. Social Forces 13(2): 230-237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenz, Alexandra N. & Glauninger, Manfred M. (eds). 2015. Standarddeutsch im 21. Jahrhundert [Wiener Arbeiten zur Linguistik 1]. Vienna: Vienna University Press.Google Scholar
Liebscher, Grit & Dailey-O’Cain, Jennifer. 2009. Language attitudes in interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13(2): 195-222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meinefeld, Werner. 1988. Einstellung. In Handwörterbuch der Psychologie, 4th edn, Roland Asanger & Gerd Wenninger (eds), 120-126. Munich: PVU.Google Scholar
Miles, Matthew B. & Huberman, A. Michael. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Miles, Matthew B., Huberman, A. Michael & Saldana, Johnny. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Moosmüller, Sylvia. 1988. Dialekt ist nicht gleich Dialekt: Spracheinschätzung in Wien. Wiener Linguistische Gazette 40-41: 55-80.Google Scholar
. 1991. Hochsprache und Dialekt in Österreich. Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Morgan, David L. 2007. Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1):48-76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Ortega y Gasset, José. 1959. The difficulty of reading, Clarence E. Parmenter (transl.). Diogenes 7(28):1-17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osgood, Charles E., Suci, George J. & Tannenbaum, Percy H. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Potter, Jonathan. 1998. Discursive social psychology: From attitudes to evaluative practices. European Review of Social Psychology 9(1): 233-266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan & Wetherell, Margaret. 1987. Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Raskin, Jonathan D. 2002. Constructivism in psychology: Personal construct psychology, radical constructivism, and social constructionism. In Jonathan D. Raskin & Sara K. Bridges (eds) Studies in Meaning, 1-25. New York NY: Pace University Press.Google Scholar
Richards, Lyn. 2005. Handling Qualitative Data. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Saxe, John Godfrey & Galdone, Paul. 1963. The Blind Men and the Elephant. New York NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Scheuringer, Hermann. 1997. Sprachvarietäten in Österreich. In Varietäten des Deutschen, Gerhard Stickel (ed.), 332-335. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1994. Approaches to Discourse. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2002. Mother and friends in a Holocaust life story. Language in Society 31(3): 309-353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Discourse. In An Introduction to Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, Ralph W. Fasold & Jeff Connor-Linton (eds), 183-215. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Schilling, Natalie. 2013. Investigating stylistic variation. In The Handbook of Language Variation and Change, 2nd edn, Jack K. Chambers & Natalie Schilling (eds), 327-349. Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 2004. Constructing ethnicity in interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics 8(2):163-195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron. 2003. The dialogist in a positivist world: Theory in the social sciences and the humanities at the end of the twentieth century. Social Semiotics 13(1):71-88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron & Scollon, Suzie Wong. 2004. Nexus Analysis. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Soukup, Barbara. 2009. Dialect Use as Interaction Strategy. Vienna: Braumüller.Google Scholar
. 2011. Austrian listeners’ perceptions of standard-dialect style-shifting: An empirical approach. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15(3): 347-365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013a. The measurement of ‘language attitudes’: A reappraisal from a constructionist perspective. In Language (De)standardisation in Late Modern Europe, 251-266. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
. 2013b. On matching speaker (dis)guises: Revisiting a methodological tradition. In Language (De)standardisation in Late Modern Europe, Stefan Grondelaers & Tore Kristiansen (eds), 267-285. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
. 2014. Konstruktivismus trifft auf Methodik in der Spracheinstellungsforschung: Theorie, Daten, Fazit. In Sprechen über Sprache, Christina Cuonz & Rebekka Studler (eds), 143-168.Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Steinegger, Guido. 1998. Sprachgebrauch und Sprachbeurteilung in Österreich und Südtirol. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1989. Talking Voices. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah & Wallat, Cynthia. 1993. Interactive frames and knowledge schemas in interaction: Examples from a medical examination/ interview. In Framing in discourse, Deborah Tannen (ed.), 57-76. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Tashakkori, Abbas & Creswell, John W. 2007. Editorial: The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1): 3-7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tashakkori, Abbas & Teddlie, Charles (eds) 2010. The SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teddlie, Charles & Tashakkori, Abbas. 2010. Overview of contemporary issues in mixed methods research. In Tashakkori & Teddlie (eds), 1-41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tophinke, Doris & Ziegler, Evelyn. 2006. “Aber bitte im Kontext!“ Neue Perspektiven der dialektologischen Einstellungsforschung. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie 1: 205-224.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, Lev S. 1978. Mind in Society. Michael Cole, Vera John-Steiner, Sylvia Scribner & Ellen Souberman (eds). Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 2004. Text, Context, Pretext. Malden MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiesinger, Peter. 2006. Das österreichische Deutsch in Gegenwart und Geschichte. Vienna: LIT.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Truan, Naomi & Esther Jahns
2024. Introduction: Language ideologies—again? New insights from a flourishing field. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 12:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Hoffmeister, Toke
2021. Gerd Antos, Thomas Niehr, Jürgen Spitzmüller (Hg.). 2019. Handbuch Sprache im Urteil der Öffentlichkeit (Sprache und Wissen 10). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. 471 S.. Zeitschrift für Rezensionen zur germanistischen Sprachwissenschaft 13:1-2 ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo
Prikhodkine, Alexei
2021. Attitudes to accents. In Pragmatics of Accents [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 327], ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo
Kristiansen, Tore
2020. Methods in language-attitudes research. In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Kristiansen, Tore
2022. Methods in language-attitudes research. In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 1702 ff. DOI logo
Soukup, Barbara
2020. Survey area selection in Variationist Linguistic Landscape Study (VaLLS). Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 6:1 ► pp. 52 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.