Manipulative Dominant Discoursing: Alarmist Recruitment and Perspective Gatekeeping. A Grounded Theory

Main Article Content

Debbie Garratt
Joanna Patching

Abstract

This paper is a grounded theory explaining the main concern of practitioners in Australia when interacting with women on the issue of abortion. Based on a broad data set including practitioner interviews, professional notes, and discourse data, collection and analysis were undertaken using Classic Grounded Theory research design. The analysis led to the development of the grounded theory, Manipulative Dominant Discoursing: Alarmist Recruitment and Perspective Gatekeeping.


 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Garratt, D., & Patching, J. (2019). Manipulative Dominant Discoursing: : Alarmist Recruitment and Perspective Gatekeeping. A Grounded Theory. Grounded Theory Review, 18(01), 99–117. Retrieved from https://groundedtheoryreview.org/index.php/gtr/article/view/301
Section
Articles

References

Bar-Tal, D. (2017). Self-censorship as a socio-political-psychological phenomenon: Conception and research. Advances in Political Psychology, 38, Suppl.1. Blue Water Medical. Retrieved from https://www.bluewatermedical.com.au/other-info/

Cassagrande, D. (2004). Power and the rhetorical manipulation of cognitive dissonance, Paper delivered at the Presidential session of the Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association. December 15-19, Atlanta.

Chan, A., & Sage, L. (2005). Estimating Australia’s abortion rates 1985-2003. Medical Journal of Australia, 182(9), 447-452.

Cialdini, R., & Goldstein, N. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 591-621.

Clementson, D. (2018). Deceptively dodging questions: A theoretical note on issues of perception and detection. Discourse and Communication, 12(5), 478-496.

Coleman, P. (2011). Abortion and mental health: Quantitative synthesis and analysis of research published 1995-2009. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 199, 180-186.

Eisenberg, E. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organisational communication. Communication Monographs 51, 227-242.

Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The birth of a prison. London, UK: Penguin.

Garratt, D. (2018). Reflections on being an expert. Grounded Theory Review, 17(1).

Glaser, B., & Strauss, C. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Happer, C., & Philo, G. (2013). The Role of the media in the construction of public belief and social change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1(1), 321-336.

Holton, J., & Walsh, I. (2017). Classic grounded theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks.

Huckin, T. (2002). Textual silence and the discourse of homelessness. Discourse & Society, 13(3), 347-372.

Jorgensen, C. (2007). The relevance of intention in argument evaluation. Argumentation, 21, 165-174.

Levine, T. (2014). Truth-default theory (TDT): A theory of human deception and deception detection, Journal of Language and Social Psychology 33, 378–392.

Maillat, D., & Oswald, S. (2009). Defining manipulative discourse: The pragmatics of cognitive illusions, International Review of Pragmatics, 1, 348-370.

Martin, L., Hassinger J., Debbink M. & Harris, L. (2017). Dangertalk: Voices of abortion providers. Social Science Medicine, July (184), 75-83.

Newton, D., Bayly, C., McNamee, K., Hardiman, A., Bismark, M., Webster, A. & Keogh, L. (2016). How do women seeking abortion choose between surgical and medical abortion? Perspectives from abortion service providers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 56, 523-529.

Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The Spiral of silence; A theory of public opinion. The Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43-51.

Portman, C. (2018). Health, communities, disability services and family violence prevention committee hearing. Queensland Parliament 12/9/18. Retrieved from http://tv.parliament.qld.gov.au/Committees?reference=C4792#parentVerticalTab5

Rigotti, E. (2005). Towards a typology of manipulative processes. In L. de Saussure and P. Schultz, ed., Manipulation and Ideologies in the Twentieth Century: Discourse, Language, Mind. John Benjamins Publishing, Philadelphia, 61-83.

Stokke, A. (2016). Lying and misleading in discourse, Philosophical Review, 125(1), 83-134.

van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage Publications, Inc.London.

van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(2), 359-383.

van Dijk, T. A. (1996). Discourse, power and access. In Caldas-Coulthard, R. and Coulthard, M. (Eds). Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, Taylor and Francis, London, 93-113.

Most read articles by the same author(s)