Abstract
In this paper, I discuss how numbers and words are used in constructionist research. I begin by challenging the simple pairing of qualitative research with constructionism by briefly highlighting the variations in both approaches. I then describe three possibilities for the use of words in constructionist research: 1) words as constructive of social conditions, 2) words as constructive of types of people, morality, and emotions (Loseke 1999), and 3) words as reflexively connected with concrete conditions (Gubrium and Holstein 1997). Concerning the use of numbers, I offer five typologies: 1) objectivist use of numbers to confirm the existence of a priori social conditions, 2) deconstructing numbers to point to their fallacies (i.e., how they got it wrong), 3) revealing numbers as constructions in their own right, 4) contrasting numbers with subjective or lived experiences (i.e., how it feels), and 5) the use of numbers in combination with words in the context of mixed-methods research. I end by considering the implications of my analysis, particularly for combining qualitative and quantitative data in the study of social problems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atkinson, P. (2005). Qualitative research? Unity and diversity. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 6 no. 3: Art. 26. http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-05/05-3-26-e.htm (accessed April 8, 2019).
Becker, H. (1953). Becoming a marihuana user. American Journal of Sociology, 59(3), 235–242.
Bengtsson, T. T. (2014). What are data? Ethnographic experiences with young offenders. Qualitative Research, 14(6), 729–744. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113488125.
Bergman, M. (2011). The politics, fashions, and conventions of research methods. Journal of mixed research methods, 5(2), 99–102.
Best, J. (1987). Rhetoric in claims-making: Constructing the missing children problem. Social Problems, 34(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1987.34.2.03a00010.
Best, J. (2003). But seriously folks: The limitations of the strict constructionist interpretation of social problems. Pp. 51–69 in in J. Holstein & G. Miller (eds.), Challenges and choices: Constructionist perspectives on social problems. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Best, J. (2017). Joseph Gusfield and social problems theory. The American Sociologist, 48(1), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-015-9295-4.
Bilderback, L. (1989). “A greater threat than the Soviet Union”: Mexican immigration as a social problem. In J. Best (Ed.), Images of Issues (pp. 223–241). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Briggs, C. L. (1986). Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social science research. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Christ, T. W. (2007). A recursive approach to mixed methods research in a longitudinal study of postsecondary education disability support services. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807301101.
Cicourel, A. V. (1974). Theory and method in a study of argentine fertility. New York: Wiley.
Colditz, J. B., Welling, J., Smith, N. A., James, A. E., & Primack, B. A. (2019). World vaping day: Contextualizing vaping culture in online social media using a mixed methods approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(2), 196–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817702753.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2004). Methodological issues in the study of social problems. Pp. 30–46 in G. Ritzer (ed.), Handbook of social problems: A comparative international perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2008). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp. 1–43). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. (2018). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 1–26). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Edwards, D. (1996). Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.
Ellis, C., & Ellingson, L. (2001). Qualitative methods. Pp. 2287–2296 in Encyclopedia of sociology, 2nd edition, vol. 4, Macmillan Reference USA. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/apps/doc/CX3404400297/GVRL?u=psucic&sid=GVRL&xid=755637af. Accessed 8 Oct. 2018.
Ellis, C., & Ellingson, L. (2008). Autoethnography as constructionist project. In J. Gubrium & J. Holstein (Eds.), The handbook of constructionist research (pp. 445–466). New York: Guilford Press.
Ellis, C., & Flaherty, M. G. (1992). Investigating subjectivity: Research on lived experience. Newbury Park: Sage.
Fetters, M. D., & Freshwater, D. (2015). The 1 + 1 = 3 integration challenge. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(2), 115–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815581222.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Goode, E., & Ben-Yehuda, N. (2009). Moral panics: The social construction of deviance (2nd ed.). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191–215). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J. (1997). The new language of qualitative method. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J. (1998). Narrative practice and the coherence of personal stories. Sociological Quarterly, 39, 163–187.
Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J. (2000). Institutional selves: Troubled identities in a postmodern world. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gusfield, J. R. (1966). Symbolic crusade: Status politics and the American temperance movement. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Hacking, I. (1999). Social construction of what? Harvard University Press.
Hancock, B. H., Sykes, B. L., & Verma, A. (2018). The problem of “cameo appearances” in mixed-methods research: Implications for twenty-first-century ethnography. Sociological Perspectives, 61(2), 314–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121418756045.
Harris, S. R. (2006). Social constructionism and social inequality: An introduction to a special issue of JCE. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(3), 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286816.
Heritage, J., & Clayman, S. (2010). Talk in action: Interactions, identities, and institutions. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hesse-Biber, S. N., Rodriguez, D., & Frost, N. A. (2015). A qualitatively driven approach to multimethod and mixed methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry (pp. 3–20). New York: Oxford University Press.
Holstein, J., & Gubrium, J. (1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Holstein, J., & Miller, G. (1993). Social construction and social problems work. In G. Miller & J. Holstein (Eds.), Constructionist Controversies: Issues in social problems theory (pp. 131–152). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Ibarra, P., & Kitsuse, J. (1993). Vernacular constituents of moral discourse: An interactionist proposal for the study of social problems. In J. Holstein & G. Miller (Eds.), Reconsidering social constructionism (pp. 25–58). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Jenkins, P. (1994). Using murder: The social construction of serial homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Kitsuse, J. I., & Cicourel, A. V. (1963). A note on the uses of official statistics. Social Problems, 11(2), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1963.11.2.03a00020.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lincoln, Y. S. (2010). What a long, strange trip it’s been . . . 25 years of qualitative and new paradigm research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 3–9.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Loseke, D. R. (1989). Creating clients: Social problems work in a shelter for battered women. In J. Holstein & G. Miller (Eds.), Perspectives on social problems (volume 1) (pp. 173–193). Greenwich: JAI Press.
Loseke, D. (1993). Constructing conditions: People, morality, and emotion: Expanding the agenda of constructionism. In G. Miller & J. Holstein (Eds.), Constructionist Controversies: Issues in social problems theory (pp. 207–216). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Loseke, D. R. (1999). Thinking about social problems: An introduction to constructionist perspectives. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Marvasti, A. B. (2003). Being homeless: Textual and narrative constructions. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906292462.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (1986). Data from drug abuse warning network: Annual data 1985. Statistical Series I, #5. Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Nichols, L. T., Nolan, J. J., & Colyer, C. J. (2008). Scorekeeping versus storytelling: Representational practices in the construction of “hate crime”. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 30, 361–379.
Platt, J. (1996). A history of sociological research methods in America: 1920–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rambo, C. (2016). Strange accounts: Applying for the department chair position and writing threats and secrets “in play”. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 45(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241615611729.
Reinarman, C., & Levine, H. (1989). The crack attack: Politics and media in America’s latest drug scare. In J. Best (Ed.), Images of issues (pp. 115–137). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Seltzer-Kelly, D., Westwood, S. J., & Peña-Guzman, D. M. (2012). A methodological self-study of quantitizing: Negotiating meaning and revealing multiplicity. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(4), 258–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689811425798.
Spector, M., & Kitsuse, J. (1987). Constructing social problems. New York: Aldine de Gruyer.
Spencer, J. W. (1994). Homeless in River City: Client work in human service encounters. In J. Holstein & G. Miller (Eds.), Perspectives on social problems (volume 6) (pp. 29–46). Greenwich: JAI Press.
Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906293042.
Thibodeaux, J. (2014). Three versions of constructionism and their reliance on social conditions in social problems research. Sociology, 48(4), 829–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038513511560.
Vidich, A., & Lyman, S. (2000). Qualitative methods: Their history in sociology and anthropology. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 37–84). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Weinberg, D. (2008). Philosophical foundations of constructionist research. In J. Gubrium & J. Holstein (Eds.), The handbook of constructionist research (pp. 13–39). New York: Guilford Press.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to Professors Lawrence Nichols and Michael Adorjan for their comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marvasti, A. Words and Numbers in Constructionist Research. Am Soc 50, 228–246 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-019-9414-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-019-9414-8