Skip to main content

Poetic Content Analysis

  • 182 Accesses

Abstract

This Chapter has presents an outline of poetic content analysis, a research method for developing and interrogating science communication research questions by using poetry as data. As well as introducing this method and how to use it in practice, this Chapter also discusses the importance of considering your theoretical perspectives, and the need to ensure that there is a good alignment between research question and research method.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-96829-8_4
  • Chapter length: 30 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-96829-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 4.1
Fig. 4.2
Fig. 4.3

References

  1. Scotland J (2012) Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: relating ontology and epistemology to the methodology and methods of the scientific, interpretive, and critical research paradigms. Engl Lang Teach 5(9):9–16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n9p9

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Gray DE (2013) Doing research in the real world. SAGE Publications Ltd., London

    Google Scholar 

  3. Joffe H (2012) Thematic analysis. In: Harper D, Thompson A (eds) qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy: a guide for students and practitioners. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 5(9):1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. McDermott JF Jr, Porter D (1989) The efficacy of poetry therapy: a computerized content analysis of the death poetry of Emily Dickinson. Psychiatry 52(4):462–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1989.11024470

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Hoover DL, Culpeper J, O’Halloran K (2014) Digital literary studies: Corpus approaches to poetry, prose, and drama, vol 16. Routledge, New York

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Vitouladiti O (2014) Content analysis as a research tool for marketing, management and development strategies in tourism. Procedia Econ Finance 9:278–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00029-X

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Shea NA (2015) Examining the nexus of science communication and science education: a content analysis of genetics news articles. J Res Sci Teach 52(3):397–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21193

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Welbourne DJ, Grant WJ (2016) Science communication on YouTube: factors that affect channel and video popularity. Public Underst Sci 25(6):706–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515572068

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Bullock OM, Amill DC, Shulman HC et al (2019) Jargon as a barrier to effective science communication: evidence from metacognition. Public Underst Sci 28(7):845–853. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519865687

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706QP063OA

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Erlingsson C, Brysiewicz, (2017) A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. African J Emerg Med 7(3):93–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  13. Gowda MVR, Fox JC, Magelky RD (1997) Students’ understanding of climate change: insights for scientists and educators. Bull Am Meteor Soc 78(10):2232–2240. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477-78.10.2232

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Roh NK, Park YM, Kang H et al (2015) Awareness, knowledge, and vaccine acceptability of herpes zoster in Korea: a multicenter survey of 607 patients. Ann Dermatol 27(5):531–538. https://doi.org/10.5021/ad.2015.27.5.531

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Cook JM, Plourde D (2016) Do scholars follow Betteridge’s Law? the use of questions in journal article titles. Scientometrics 108:1119–1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2030-2

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Boell SK, Cecez-Kecmanovic D (2015) On being ‘systematic’ in literature reviews. In: Willcocks LP, Sauer C, Lacity MC (eds) Formulating research methods for information systems. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Poetry Foundation (2021) Poetry foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org. Accessed 10 Dec 2021

  18. The Poetry Society (2021) The poetry society. https://poetrysociety.org.uk. Accessed 10 Dec 2021

  19. The Poetry Archive (2021) The poetry archive. https://poetryarchive.org. Accessed 10 Dec 2021

  20. Dey I (1993) Qualitative data analysis: a user friendly guide for social scientists. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  21. Han J, Kamber M, Pei J (2012) Data mining: concepts and techniques. Elsevier, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Graneheim UH, Lundman B (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 24(2):105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Teherani A, Martimianakis T, Stenfors-Hayes T et al (2015) Choosing a qualitative research approach. J Grad Med Educ 7(4):669–670. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-15-00414.1

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  24. Illingworth S, Jack K (2018) Rhyme and reason-using poetry to talk to underserved audiences about environmental change. Clim Risk Manag 19:120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2018.01.001

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  25. Whitehead H, Smith TD, Rendell L (2021) Adaptation of sperm whales to open-boat whalers: rapid social learning on a large scale? Biol Let 17(3):20210030. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2021.0030

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Edwards-Jones A (2014) Qualitative data analysis with NVIVO. J Educ Teach 40(2):193–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2013.866724

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  27. Morse JM, Barrett M, Mayan M et al (2002) Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods 1(2):13–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  28. Cypress BS (2017) Rigor or reliability and validity in qualitative research: Perspectives, strategies, reconceptualization, and recommendations. Dimens Crit Care Nurs 36(4):253–263. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCC.0000000000000253

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  29. Neves K (2010) Cashing in on cetourism: a critical ecological engagement with dominant E-NGO discourses on whaling, cetacean conservation, and whale watching. Antipode 42(3):719–741. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00770.x

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  30. McLoughlin N, Corner A, Capstick S et al (2018) Climate communication in practice: how are we engaging the UK public on climate change? Climate Outreach, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  31. Whitmarsh L, Corner A (2017) Tools for a new climate conversation: a mixed-methods study of language for public engagement across the political spectrum. Glob Environ Change 42:122–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.12.008

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  32. Illingworth S, Simpson D (eds) (2017) A change of climate. CreateSpace, Scotts Valley

    Google Scholar 

  33. Palmer PI, O’Doherty S, Allen G et al (2018) A measurement-based verification framework for UK greenhouse gas emissions: an overview of the Greenhouse gAs Uk and Global Emissions (GAUGE) project. Atmos Chem Phys 18(16):11753–11777. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-11753-2018

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  34. Cotterill E (2019) The day of the flying ants. Smith|Doorstop Books, Sheffield

    Google Scholar 

  35. O’Neill S, Nicholson-Cole S (2009) “Fear Won’t Do It” promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Sci Commun 30(3):355–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547008329201

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  36. Ferreira J (2018) Fostering sustainable behaviour in retail: looking beyond the coffee cup. Soc Bus 8(1):21–28. https://doi.org/10.1362/204440818X15208755029519

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  37. Weber EU (2010) What shapes perceptions of climate change? WIREs Clim Change 1:332–342. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.41

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  38. Yang C-J, Oppenheimer M (2007) A “Manhattan Project” for climate change? Clim Change 80:199–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9202-7

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  39. Jones E (2009) In conversation with norm sibum. PN Rev 36(1):46–49

    Google Scholar 

  40. Hughes JD (2009) An environmental history of the world: humankind’s changing role in the community of life. Routledge, London

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  41. Mcmullen CP, Jabbour J (eds) (2009) Climate change science compendium. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  42. Shah NY, Wirkus L, Swatuk LA (2018) Can climate change challenges unite a divided Jordan River Basin? In: Swatuk LA, Wirkus L (eds) Water, climate change and the boomerang effect. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  43. Morton TA, Rabinovich A, Marshall D et al (2011) The future that may (or may not) come: how framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Glob Environ Chang 21(1):103–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.013

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  44. Dickinson JL, Crain R, Yalowitz S et al (2013) How framing climate change influences citizen scientists’ intentions to do something about it. J Environ Educ 44(3):145–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2012.742032

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  45. Bilandzic H, Kalch A, Soentgen J (2017) Effects of goal framing and emotions on perceived threat and willingness to sacrifice for climate change. Sci Commun 39(4):466–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017718553

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  46. Berryman DR (2019) Ontology, epistemology, methodology, and methods: information for librarian researchers. Med Ref Serv Q 38(3):271–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2019.1623614

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  47. Illingworth S (2020) This bookmark gauges the depths of the human: how poetry can help to personalise climate change. Geosci Commun 3(1):35–47. https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-35-2020

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  48. Soldati A, Illingworth S (2020) In my remembered country: what poetry tells us about the changing perceptions of volcanoes between the nineteenth and twenty-first centuries. Geosci Commun 3(1):73–87. https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-73-2020

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sam Illingworth .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Illingworth, S. (2022). Poetic Content Analysis. In: Science Communication Through Poetry. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96829-8_4

Download citation