Cover not available
Part of
Writing(s) at the Crossroads: The process–product interface
Edited by Georgeta Cislaru
[Not in series 194] 2015
► pp. 33–54

Methodology

Investigating real-life writing processes

| ITEM-ENS, France
| Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Department of Applied Linguistics
Doing writing research in real-life settings means investigating individual, collaborative, and organizational writing and text production in complex and dynamic contexts. Methodological questions need to be clarified, such as: which method fits which problem and how should and can various methods complement each other? – In our paper, we start from two methodologically complementary approaches of doing research into real-life writing processes (part 1). Based on these approaches, we then explain why collecting data represents a key challenge in the history of writing research (part 2). Finally, we outline a typology of state-of-the-art methods in writing research that can be combined to face this methodological challenge (part 3).
Keywords: Idée suisse, methodology, Progression analysis, Text Genetics, writing
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 5 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.194.03gre
References (99)
References
Abbott, Robert D., Dagmar Amtmann, and Jeff Munson. 2006. “Statistical analysis for field experiments and longitudinal data in writing research.” In Handbook of Writing Research, ed. by Charles A. MacArthur, Steve Graham, and Jill Fitzgerald, 374–385. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Alatis, James E., Heidi E. Hamilton, and Ai-Hui Tan (Eds.). 2002. Linguistics, Language and the Professions. Education, Journalism, Law, Medicine, and Technology. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Google Scholar
Antos, Gerd. 1989. “Textproduktion. Ein einführender Überblick.” In Textproduktion. Ein interdisziplinärer Forschungsüberblick, ed. by Gerd Antos, and Hans Peter Krings, 5–57. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1991. The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bisaillon, Jocelyne. 2007. “Professional editing strategies used by six editors.” Written Communication 24(4): 295–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bracewell, Robert J. 2003. “Tasks, ensembles, and activity. Linkages between text production and situation of use in the workplace.” Written Communication 20(4): 511–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Camps, Joaquim. 2003. “Concurrent and retrospective verbal reports as tools to better understand the role of attention in second language tasks.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 13(2): 201–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Candlin, Sally. 2003. “Issues arising when the professional workplace is the site of applied linguistic research.” Applied Linguistics 24(3): 386–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chin, Elaine. 1994a. “Ethnographic interviews and writing research. A critical examination of the methodology.” In Speaking About Writing. Reflections on Research Methodology, ed. by Peter Smagorinsky, 247–272. Thousand Oaks et al.: Sage.Google Scholar
. 1994b. “Redefining “context” in research on writing.” Written Communication 11(4): 445–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron Victor. 2003. “On contextualizing applied linguistic research in the workplace.” Applied Linguistics 24(3): 360–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, Guy. 2003. Applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cottle, Simon. 1998. “Participant observation: Researching news production.” In Mass Communication Research Methods, ed. by Andres Hansen, Simon Cottle, Chris Newbold, and Ralph Negrine, 25–65. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
de Biasi, Pierre-Marc. 2011. Génétique des textes. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
Degenhardt, Marion. 2006. CAMTASIA and CATMOVIE. “Two digital tools for observing, documenting and analysing writing processes of university students.” In Writing and Digital media, ed. by Luuk Van Waes, Mariëlle Leijten, and Christine M. Neuwirth, 180–186. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Daniel Perrin. 2009. “Capturing translation processes to access metalinguistic awareness.” Across Languages and Cultures 10(2): 275–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekström, Mats. 2001. “Politicians interviewed on television news.” Discourse & Society 12(5): 563–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, Ken A., and Herbert A. Simon. 1984. Protocol Analysis. Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. Protocol Analysis. Verbal Reports as Data. (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fang, Irving. 1991. Writing Style Differences in Newspaper, Radio and Television News. Minnesota: Center for Interdisciplinary Studies of Writing, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Ferrer, Daniel. 2011. Logiques du brouillon. Modèles pour une critique génétique. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Flinn, Jane Z. 1987. “Case studies of revision aided by keystroke recording and replaying software.” Computers and Composition 5(1): 31–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gnach, Aleksandra, Esther Wiesner, Andrea Bertschi-Kaufmann, and Daniel Perrin. 2007. “Children’s writing processes when using computers. Insights based on combining analyses of product and process.” Research in Comparative and International Education 2(1): 13–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
Gravengaard, Gitte. 2012. “The metaphors journalists live by. Journalists’ conceptualisation of newswork.” Journalism 2012(13): 1064–1082. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greene, Stuart, and Lorraine Higgins. 1994. ““Once upon a time”: The use of retrospective accounts in building theory in composition.” In Speaking About Writing. Reflections on Research Methodology, ed. by Peter Smagorinsky, 115–140. Thousand Oaks et al.: Sage.Google Scholar
Grésillon, Almuth. 1987. “Wege und Irrwege. Zu Heines Gedicht “Lebensfahrt”.” In Literarische Schreibprozesse [Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik], ed. by Brigitte Schlieben-Lange, and Almuth Grésillon, 84–103. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
. 1994. Eléments de critique génétique. Lire les manuscrits modernes. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
. 1997. “Slow: work in progress.” Word & Image 13(2): 106–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. “Langage de l’ébauche. Parole intérieure extériorisée.” Langages 147: 19–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Ed.). 2008a. La Mise en œuvre. Itinéraires génétiques. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
. 2008b. “Lire pour écrire.” In La Mise en œuvre. Itinéraires génétiques, ed. by Almuth Grésillon, 67–81. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
. 2008c. “Ponge: «L’Ardoise» dans tous ses états.” In La Mise en œuvre. Itinéraires génétiques, ed. by Almuth Grésillon, 207–241. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Erfahrungen mit Textgenese, Critique génétique und Interpretation.” In Text – Material – Medium. Zur Relevanz editorischer Dokumentationen für die literaturwissenschaftliche Interpretation, ed. by Wolfgang Lukas, Rüdiger Nutt-Kofoth, and Madleen Podewski, 66–79. Berlin et al.: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Grésillon, Almuth, and Jean-Louis Lebrave. 2008. “Linguistique et génétique des textes. Un décalogue.” Le Français moderne [Numéro spécial publié à l’occasion de son 75e anniversaire]: 37–49.Google Scholar
Grésillon, Almuth, Jean-Louis Lebrave, and Catherine Fuchs. 1991. “«Ruminer Hérodias». Du cognitif-visuel au verbal-textuel.” In L’écriture et ses doubles. Genèse et variation textuelle, ed. by Daniel Ferrer, and Jean-Louis Lebrave, 27–109. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
Grésillon, Almuth, and Marie-Madeleine Mervant-Roux. 2010. “Marguerite Duras/Claude Régy. «L’amante anglaise». Genèse d’une écriture, gésine d’un théâtre.” In Genèses théâtrales, ed. by Almuth Grésillon, Marie-Madeleine Mervant-Roux, and Dominique Budor, 211–232. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
Hanauer, David Ian, and Karen Englander. 2013. Scientific Writing in a Second Language. Anderson: Parlor Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, Gyde. 2006. “Retrospection methods in translator training and translation research.” Journal of Specialised Translation 5: 2–40.Google Scholar
Häusermann, Jürg. 2007. “Zugespieltes Material. Der O-Ton und seine Interpretation.” In Original/Ton. Zur Mediengeschichte des O-Tons, ed. by Harun Maye, Cornelius Reiber, and Nikolaus Wegmann, 25–50. Konstanz: UVK.Google Scholar
Hay, Louis. 2002. La littérature des écrivains. Questions de critique génétique. Paris: Corti.Google Scholar
Herschberg Pierrot, Anne. 1994. “Les notes de Proust.” Genesis 6: 61–78.Google Scholar
Keseling, Gisbert. 1992. “Pause and intonation contours in written and oral discourse.” In Cooperating With Written Texts. The Pragmatics and Comprehension of Written Texts, ed. by Dieter Stein, 31–66. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klemm, Michael. 2000. Zuschauerkommunikation. Formen und Funktionen der alltäglichen kommunikativen Fernsehaneignung. Frankfurt am Main et al.: Lang.Google Scholar
Kollberg, Py, and Kerstin Severinson-Eklundh. 2002. “Studying writers’ revising patterns with S-notation analysis.” In Contemporary Tools and Techniques for Studying Writing, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Thierry Olive, 89–104. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Veronika. 2004. “Businesswomen and war metaphors: “Possessive, jealous and pugnacious”?” Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(1): 3–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krings, Hans Peter. 1992. “Schwarze Spuren auf weißem Grund. Fragen, Methoden und Ergebnisse der empirischen Schreibprozeßforschung im Überblick.” In Textproduktion. Neue Wege der Forschung, ed. by Hans Peter Krings, and Gerd Antos, 45–110. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.Google Scholar
Lams, Lutgard. 2011. “Newspapers’ narratives based on wire stories. Facsimiles of input?” Journal of Pragmatics 43(7): 1853–1864. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lebrave, Jean-Louis. 1987. “Lecture et analyse des brouillons.” Langages 69: 11–23.Google Scholar
. 1992. “La critique génétique. Une discipline nouvelle ou un avatar moderne de la philologie?” Genesis 1: 33–72.Google Scholar
Levin, Tamar, and Till Wagner. 2006. “In their own words: Understanding student conceptions of writing through their spontaneous metaphors in the science classroom.” Instructional Science 34(3): 227–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levy, C. Michael, Pamela J. Marek, and Joseph Lea. 1996. “Concurrent and retrospective protocols in writing research.” In Theories, Models and Methodology in Writing Research, ed. by Gert Rijlaarsdam, Huub Van den Bergh, and Michael Couzijn, 542–556. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, C. Michael, and Sarah Ransdell. 1996. “Writing signatures.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 127–148. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lillis, Theresa. 2008. “Ethnography as method, methodology, and “deep theorizing”. Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research.” Written Communication 25(3): 353–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindgren, Eva, and Kirk Sullivan. 2006. “Analysing online revision.” In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing. Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 157–188. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Litosselity, Lia (Ed.). 2009. Research Methods in Linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Luginbühl, Martin, Thomas Baumberger, Kathrine Schwab, and Harald Burger. 2002. Medientexte zwischen Autor und Publikum. Intertextualität in Presse, Radio und Fernsehen. Zürich: Seismo.Google Scholar
MacMillan, Stuart. 2012. “The promise of ecological inquiry in writing research.” TechnicalCommunication Quarterly 21(4): 346–361.Google Scholar
Mahrer, Rudolf. 2006. “Quand Ramuz remonte le courant. Réécriture des romans en vue des œuvres complètes.” Genesis 27: 59–72.Google Scholar
McCarthy, Michael. 2001. Issues in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob L. 2005. “Discourse and metadiscourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 37(9): 1323–1324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, Daniel. 2003. “Progression analysis (PA). Investigating writing strategies at the workplace.” Journal of Pragmatics 35(6): 907–921. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Medienlinguistik (2 ed.). Konstanz: UVK.Google Scholar
. 2012. “La voie tranquille. Routine und Emergenz in Formulierungsprozessen als service public.” In Schreib- und Textroutinen. Theorie, Erwerb und didaktisch-mediale Modellierung, ed. by Helmuth Feilke, and Katrin Lehnen, 215–239. Frankfurt am Main et al.: Lang.Google Scholar
. 2013. The Linguistics of Newswriting. Amsterdam, New York et al.: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, Daniel, and Marc Wildi. 2010. “Statistical modeling of writing processes.” In Traditions of Writing Research, ed. by Charles Bazerman, 378–393. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Peterson, Mark Allen. 2001. “Getting to the story. Unwriteable discourse and interpretive practice in American journalism.” Anthropological Quarterly 74(4): 201–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quandt, Thorsten. 2008. “News tuning and content management. An observation study of old and new routines in German online newsrooms.” In Making Online News. The Ethnography of New Media Production, ed. by Chris Paterson, and David Domingo, 77–97. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Robinson, Sue. 2009. “A chronicle of chaos. Tracking the news story of hurricane Katrina from The Times-Picayune to its website.” Journalism 10(4): 431–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted, and Carel Van Wijk. 1996. “Text analysis as a research tool. How hierarchical text structure contributes to the understanding of conceptual processes in writing.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 251–270. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schindler, Kirsten, and Joanna Wolfe. 2014. “Beyond single authors. Organizational text production as collaborative writing.” In Handbook of Writing and Text Production, Vol. 10, ed. by Daniel Perrin, and Eva-Maria Jakobs, 159–173. New York et al.: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Barbara. 2002. “Theorizing structure and agency in workplace writing. An ethnomethodological approach.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication> 16(2): 170–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schultz, Katherine. 2006. “Qualitative research on writing.” In Handbook of Writing Research, ed. by Charles A. MacArthur, Steve Graham, and Jill Fitzgerald, 357–373. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Severinson-Eklundh, Kerstin, and Py Kollberg. 1996. “Computer tools for tracing the writing process. From keystroke records to S-notation.” In Current Research in Writing. Theories, Models and Methodology, ed. by Gert Rijlaarsdam, Huub Van den Bergh, and Michael Couzijn, 526–541. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Severinson-Eklundh, Kerstin, and Carin Sjöholm. 1991. “Writing with a computer: a longitudinal study of writers of technical documents.” Man-Machine Studies 35: 723–749. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva, Mary Lourdes. 2012. “Camtasia in the classroom. Student attitudes and preferences for video commentary or Microsoft Word comments during the revision process.” Computers and Composition 29(1): 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sleurs, Kim, Jacobs, Geert, and Luuk Van Waes. 2003. “Constructing press releases, constructing quotations: A case study.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(2): 135–275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smagorinsky, Peter. 2001. “Rethinking protocol analysis from a cultural perspective.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 21: 233–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Ed.). 1994. Speaking About Writing. Reflections on Research Methodology. Thousand Oaks et al.: Sage.Google Scholar
Spelman Miller, Kristvan. 2006a. “Keystroke logging. An introduction.” In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing. Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 1–9. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
. 2006b. “The pausological study of written language production.” In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing. Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 11–30. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Strömqvist, Sven, Kenneth Holmqvist, Victoria Johansson, Henrik Karlsson, and Åsa Wengelin. 2006. “What key-logging can reveal about writing.” In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing. Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 45–72. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Stubbs, Michael. 1997. “Critical comments on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).” In Evolving Models of Language, ed. by Ann Ryan, and Alison Wray, 100–116. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Patricia, and James E. Porter. 1993. “On theory, practice, and method. Toward a heuristic research methodology for professional writing.” In Writing in the Workplace. New Research Perspectives, ed. by Rachel Spilka, 220–237. Carbondale et al.: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Tashakkori, Abbas, and Charles Teddlie. 2003. “Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in social and behavioral research.” In Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, ed. by Abbas Tashakkori, and Charles Teddlie, 3–50. Thousend Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Van den Bergh, Huub, and Gert Rijlaarsdam. 1996. “The dynamics of composing. Modeling writing process data.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 207–232. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van der Geest, Thea. 1996. “Studying “real life” writing processes. A proposal and an example.” In The Science of Writing. Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, ed. by C. Michael Levy, and Sarah Ransdell, 309–322. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A. 1988. News Analysis. Case Studies of International and National News in the Press. Hillsdale/London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2001. “Multidisciplinary CDA. A plea for diversity.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 95–120. Los Angeles: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Hout, Tom, and Geert Jacobs. 2008. “News production theory and practice. Fieldwork notes on power, interaction and agency.” Pragmatics 18(1): 59–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Waes, Luuk, and Anne Mangen. 2012. “Introduction. Tools for studying and supporting writing. Technological advances in writing research.” In Learning to Write Effectively. Current Trends in European Research, ed. by Mark Torrance, Denis Alamargot, Montserrat Castello, Franck Ganier, Otto Kruse, Anne Mangen, Liliana Tolchinsky, and Luuk Van Waes, 345–351. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Van Waes, Luuk, and Liesbet Van Herreweghe. 1995. “Computerprotokolle in der Schreibprozessforschung. Der Gebrauch von Keytrap als Beobachtungsinstrument.” In Wissenschaftliche Textproduktion. Mit und ohne Computer, ed. by Eva-Maria Jakobs, Dagmar Knorr, and Sylvie Molitor-Lübbert, 35–51. Frankfurt am Main et al.: Lang.Google Scholar
Wei, Li. 2007. “A user-friendly linguistics.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 17(1): 117–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werlen, Iwar. 2000. ““Zum Schluss das Wetter”. Struktur und Variation von Wetterberichten im Rundfunk.” In Sprachsplitter und Sprachspiele, ed. by Jürg Niederhauser, and Stanislaw Szlek, 155–170. Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
Whithaus, Carl, Scott B. Harrison, and Jeb Midyette. 2008. “Keyboarding compared with handwriting on a high-stakes writing assessment. Student choice of composing medium, raters’ perceptions, and text quality.” Assessing Writing 13(1): 4–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 2000. “On the limitations of linguistics applied.” Applied Linguistics 21(1): 3–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, Joanna. 2005. “Gesture and collaborative planning. A case study of a student writing group.” Written Communication 22(3): 298–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolley, Claire M. 2009. “Meeting the mixed methods challenge of integration in a sociological study of structure and agency.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 3(1): 7–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhong, Bu, and John E. Newhagen. 2009. “How journalists think while they write. A transcultural model of news decision making.” Journal of Communication 59(3): 587–608. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Manchón, Rosa M.
2021. Chapter 5. The contribution of ethnographically-oriented approaches to the study of L2 writing and text production processes. In Ethnographies of Academic Writing Research [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1], ► pp. 84 ff. DOI logo
Schneier, Joel
2021. Digital Articulation: Examining Text-Based Linguistic Performances in Mobile Communication Through Keystroke-Logging Analysis. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 3 DOI logo
Schneier, Joel
2023. Modeling Mobile Writing: Applying Sociocognitive Models of Writing to Mobile Contexts. Written Communication 40:1 ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 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.