Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice (Brito et al., 2022)

Original title: Discurso do Sujeito Coletivo na Prática 2022 MIRIM – Crianças, Infâncias e Natureza

Creative Commons License – Attribution – Non-commercial – Sharing under the same license 4.0 International. Partial or total reproduction of this work is permitted, provided that the source is cited.

The English version of this peer-reviewed production is a partnership between the study group MIRIM – Children, Childhoods, and Nature (Floras Botanical Garden, Federal University of Southern Bahia, UFSB), the Graduate Program in Society, Environment, and Quality of Life – PPGSAQ (Center for Interdisciplinary Training, Federal University of Western Pará, UFOPA), and the Graduate Program in Environmental Sciences and Technologies – PPGCTA (associate master’s degree between UFSB and the Federal Institute of Education, Science, and Technology of Bahia, IFBA, campus Porto Seguro).

Universidade Federal do Sul da Bahia Rector Joana Angélica Guimarães da Luz Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia da Bahia Rector Luzia Matos Mota Universidade Federal do Oeste do Pará Rector Hugo Alex Carneiro Diniz Graduate Program in Environmental Sciences and Technologies Coordination Jaílson Santos de Novais, UFSB Allison Gonçalves Silva, IFBA Graduate Program in Society, Environment, and Quality of Life Coordination Itamar Rodrigues Paulino, UFOPA

Floras Botanical Garden Coordination Jorge Antonio Silva Costa, UFSB MIRIM – Children, Childhoods, and Nature Coordination Jaílson Santos de Novais, UFSB Editorial board Dr. Irani Lauer Lellis, UFOPA Dr. Lina Rodrigues de Faria, UFSB Dr. João Rodrigo Santos da Silva, UFABC Dr. Roberto do Nascimento Paiva, UFOPA Financing Society, Environment, and Quality of Life Graduate Program, Federal University of Western Pará (Notice PPGSAQ/UFOPA # 2/2020) Provost for Research and Graduate School, Federal University of Southern Bahia (Notice PROPPG/UFSB # 8/2021, Process # 23746.003400/2021-88)

Catalogação na Publicação (CIP) Universidade Federal do Sul da Bahia (UFSB) Sistema de Bibliotecas (SIBI) B862d

Brito, Joscélia Monteiro Santos de, 1983 – Discourse of the collective subject in practice. / Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito, Iani Dias Lauer-Leite, Jaílson Santos de Novais. – Porto Seguro: UFSB, 2022.

61 f.

ISBN: 978-65-87232-07-2 1. Methodology. 2. Qualitative Research. 3. Social Representation. 4. Research Strategy. 5. Data Analysis. I. Brito, Joscélia Monteiro Santos de. II. Lauer-Leite, Iani Dias. III. Novais, Jaílson Santos de. IV. Título.

CDD – 001.42

Elaborado por Lucas Sousa Carvalho – CRB-5/1883

Universidade Federal do Sul da Bahia Campus Sosígenes Costa Rod. Porto Seguro-Eunápolis, BR 367, Km 10 CEP 45810-000 Porto Seguro, BA, Brazil https://www.ufsb.edu.br/ MIRIM – https://sites.google.com/csc.ufsb.edu.br/mirim/

SUMMARY PREFACE................................................................................................................ 7 PRESENTATION ................................................................................................... 9

1 WHAT IS DCS? .............................................................................................. 11 1.1 SOURCE OF VERBAL INFORMATION ..................................................................14 1.2 HOW TO COLLECT DATA THROUGH AN INTERVIEW ...................................14 1.3 DCS AND THE USE OF SOFTWARE .....................................................................15

2 METHODOLOGICAL FIGURES: CONCEPT AND PRACTICE.............. 17 2.1 KEY EXPRESSION (KE) .............................................................................................19 2.2 CENTRAL IDEA (CI) ...................................................................................................20 2.3 ANCHORS (AC) ..........................................................................................................22 2.4 DISCOURSE OF THE COLLECTIVE SUBJECT (DCS) .........................................23

3 STEP-BY-STEP TO CREATE THE DCS .................................................... 25 3.1 FIRST STAGE: DISCOURSE ANALYSIS TOOL 1 (DAT 1) ..................................27 3.1.1 FIRST STEP .................................................................................................................27 3.1.2 SECOND STEP ...........................................................................................................28 3.1.3 THIRD STEP................................................................................................................31 3.1.4 FOURTH STEP ...........................................................................................................33 3.1.5 FIFTH STEP .................................................................................................................34 3.2 SECOND STAGE: DISCOURSE ANALYSIS TOOL 2 (DAT 2) ............................35 3.2.1 FIRST STEP .................................................................................................................35 3.2.2 SECOND STEP ...........................................................................................................36

4 PRESENTATION OF THE DCS................................................................... 39 4.1 OTHERS WAYS TO PRESENT THE DCS ..............................................................44

5 A LITTLE MORE PRACTICE ....................................................................... 49

PREFACE The search for knowledge has been a tireless quest of humanity throughout the countless centuries of its existence. Science, as a method of producing knowledge, has allowed this desire to be increasingly satiated with new investigative procedures, which have made it possible to comprehend social, biological, and natural reality. As the new procedures advance, it is also necessary to find techniques that permit analysis and understanding of the phenomena/facts/evidence that arise from the most diverse research processes. This book presents one such approach.

Based on their experiences in undergraduate and graduate programs, the authors present a guide on the use of the approach knowns as Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) for young amateurs and researchers who are active in qualitative research who wish to analyze verbal texts from their investigations. The study presents a theoretical contribution that supports this analysis technique, allowing the reader to consult its primary sources. The objectivity and practicality of the book leads the reader not only to understand the DCS approach, but also creates the opportunity to experience it as one progresses through the chapters.

Chapter one is dedicated to definitions and clarifications of the type of data needed to be able to use DCS, as well as how to produce it. The authors also refer to software that can assist researchers when analyzing texts, especially when these contain information that comes from many participants. The second chapter presents the methodological figures used by this technique and conceptualizes them, providing examples that allow for the identification of these figures within the text.

In the third chapter, the authors detail the step-by-step analysis process, with several examples that facilitate learning. The fourth chapter describes different ways to present the DCS, giving the researcher the option to categorize or quantify the qualitative results, thereby expanding the possible ways of reporting the study’s findings.

The book also includes a fifth chapter with exercises designed to enhance knowledge.

Without a doubt, this book serves as a theoretical and practical guide that will help those who seek to broaden their knowledge about DCS as a perspective for analyzing verbal qualitative data, and has the potential to become a relevant source of consultation both for those who are just beginning their scientific journey, as well as those who already have experience with consolidated research and are seeking new methodologies of analysis.

Edna Ferreira Coelho Galvão Graduate Professor in Health Education – UEPA Graduate Professor in Social Sciences – UFOPA

PRESENTATION This material was originally produced in partnership between MIRIM – Children, Childhoods, and Nature, a study group of the Floras Botanical Garden, and the Environmental Science and Technology Graduate Program, an associative master’s degree program of the Federal University of Southern Bahia and the Federal Institute of Education, Science, and Technology of Bahia. This English language edition has the financial support of the Society, Environment, and Quality of Life Graduate Program – an academic master’s degree program from the Center for Interdisciplinary Training at the Federal University of Western Pará (Notice PPGSAQ/UFOPA # 2/2020) –, and of the Provost for Research and Graduate School from the Federal University of Southern Bahia (Notice PROPPG/UFSB # 8/2021, Process # 23746.003400/2021-88).

The purpose of this book is to assist researchers who wish to apply the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) approach to the analysis of qualitative data. It is written in simple language that provides a step-by-step approach to all of the stages of DCS construction. It can therefore be very useful for those who have never had contact with the technique and intend to use it after a thorough study of the theoretical framework supporting it.

The first chapter, entitled What is DCS, introduces the concept of DCS, what it is used for, and what kinds of data can be analyzed using the DCS technique. It then offers brief suggestions on how to collect data through interviews, as the quality of data collection directly impacts the quality of data analysis. Although this step-bystep procedure does not depend on the use of software, we feel it is important emphasize that software tools can assist greatly in data analysis. Should the researcher be interested, we recommend that he or she read further material on this topic.

The chapter entitled Methodological Figures: Concept and Practice presents the methodological figures used in the DCS technique: key expressions (KE), central ideas (CI), anchors (AC), and discourse of the collective subject (DCS) itself. In this chapter, we conceptualize these methodological figures and show how they are used in practice when composing the DCS. Next, the chapter Step-by-step to Create the DCS shows in detail how to use Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1) to identify the KE, CI, and AC, so that the reader can apply the entire step-by-step procedure to analyze the data from his or her research.

The same occurs with Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT 2), where we show how to compose a DCS in practice.

In the chapter Presenting the DSC, we demonstrate some examples of how to synthesize the CIs, as well as the DCS itself (discourse-synthesis), considering both the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the analysis.

Finally, the chapter A Little More Practice provides some exercises to consolidate the DCS approach. By carefully following all of the guidelines in this material, we believe you will be able to do your own analyses with confidence and success.

Enjoy your studies!

The authors

1 WHAT IS DCS?

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) is a qualitative data analysis approach that makes it possible to quantify and verify the statistical distribution of collective thought (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005; AZEVEDO; CHIARI; GOULART, 2013; MARINHO, 2015). It was developed in the late 1990s at the University of São Paulo (USP) by Ana Maria C. Lefèvre and Fernando Lefèvre (AZEVEDO; CHIARI; GOULART, 2013), with the initial intention of performing qualitative analysis in healthcare. However, the technique is a great contribution to social science research as a whole and can be used in any area of study that involves verbal data, because it has been proven to be effective in processing and expressing collective opinions (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2006).

In summary, DCS is an approach for organizing and tabulating qualitative data of a verbal nature, that gives rise to a discourse-synthesis elaborated in the first-person singular using parts of speeches with similar meaning, by means of systematic and standardized procedures. The greatest contribution of DCS is precisely the ability to compose statements without reducing them to mere quantities (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005). To perform the analysis, the entire speeches of the research subjects are used and these methodological figures are identified within them: Key Expressions (KE), Central Ideas (CI), and Anchors (AC), whose concepts will be fully explained in Chapter 2.

DCS is based on the Theory of Social Representations1 and makes it possible to know thoughts, representations, beliefs, and values of a collectivity from individual expressions on a given theme, considering that these representations are a form of socially elaborated and shared knowledge of reality, common to a social group (OLIVEIRA et al., 2018).

Before diving into a full explanation of Discourse of the Collective Subject, it is important to understand what the Theory of Social Representations consists of. This theory deals with phenomena that are observable or that can be reconstructed through scientific work. These phenomena are usually found in messages that can be conveyed in different ways, e.g., in the media, and that have become consolidated in people’s behavior. Thus, social representations are a form of knowledge having a practical purpose that is socially elaborated and shared. In this sense, it contributes to the construction of a reality that is common to a given social group. Although it can be considered common sense knowledge and not scientific, it becomes an object of scientific study, because it contains useful knowledge of cognitive processes and social interactions (JODELET, 2010).

Taking this initial concept of the Theory of Social Representations as a starting point, the Discourse of the Collective Subject can be described as a methodological strategy to investigate social representations about various phenomena present in collectivities.

Furthermore, the results produced from the DCS can be effectively used as resources

See Serge Moscovici (2007), Representações sociais - investigações em psicologia social; Jean-Claude Abric (2001), Prácticas sociales y representaciones; and, A sociologia de Pierre Bourdieu, Renato Ortiz (2013).

1

13

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

for social interventions, such as educational programs, health campaigns, or evaluation of public and private services. They can also help improve governmental political programs and provide diagnoses for participatory management, among other applications (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2014; COSTA-MARINHO, 2015).

1.1 Source of verbal information As already mentioned, DCS seeks to analyze qualitative data of a verbal nature.

In order to do this, it is first necessary to collect the raw material, that is, the verbal discourses themselves. The most commonly used method for this is the interview.

However, this data can also be collected from statements, newspaper articles, weekly magazines, and letters, among others (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005).

Therefore, when outlining his or her study, the researcher needs to define the most appropriate form of data collection and the necessary number of individual statements (sample) on the topic under study.

For the creators of the DSC, the larger the sample or number of individual statements, the greater the possibility of obtaining details that capture the imagery of the social group under study with greater richness. However, when defining the sample, the researcher must be aware of the operational and technical feasibility of analyzing the individual statements collected, as many of them can be large and complex (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005).

With the data in hand, the researcher will then analyze each individual expression, extracting from them the central ideas and anchors present in each subject’s discourse. After this, the key expressions corresponding to these central ideas and anchors can be highlighted (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005).

1.2 How to collect data through an interview The selection of techniques to be used for data collection in a research project, whether it be qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed approach, depends on the initial research design. We must start from the central question we seek to answer, the objectives we intend to achieve, or the hypotheses we wish to test. In addition, we must remember that the data collected during the study will need to be analyzed. How will this be done? Thinking about the most appropriate techniques to analyze the data is a crucial step in the research design. Otherwise, we run the risk of collecting a plethora of unnecessary data and not knowing how to properly analyze it. Or, we may collect less data than we need to satisfactorily answer the research question initially proposed. These weaknesses can be avoided with a well-designed research plan.

14

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

If the researcher chooses the interview as a data collection tool, Lefèvre and Lefèvre’s (2005) proposed guidelines can be used to support the researcher both when preparing the script and when conducting the interview, in order to be able to retrieve the social representations.

In an objective and enlightening manner, the authors point out: • The intentional choice or not of the subjects to be interviewed – ponder the influence of how choice might affect the research objectives; • Preparation of the question script – adapt the questions to the research objectives, structure questions that lead to the production of discourse with spontaneous and non-directed answers, and test the clarity of the questions; • Preparation of the interviewees – standardize the presentation, obtain the interviewees’ consent, and train the interviewers; • Preparation of the environment for the interview – keep the interviewee’s identity private, minimize problems with noise, etc.; • Preparation of equipment – in the case of recording, good preparation helps avoid losses of information or poor-quality recording; and • Environment of the interview – maintain an informal atmosphere with care so that the relaxed atmosphere does not cause interference from the researcher.

For further information on this topic, we suggest Chapter I, Part II of The discourse of the collective subject: a new approach to qualitative research (developments) (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005).

After collecting the data through voice recordings, for example, the next step is to carefully transcribe them, preserving all of the speech characteristics of each interviewee.

Before applying the DCS technique itself, it is recommended that the researcher reads the transcribed material thoroughly to become familiar with the overall data set, without interpreting it for the time being. After this initial familiarization, the first step in building the DCS is to arrange the transcripts of each interviewee’s speech in the Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1), which will be discussed below.

One important detail: the DCS technique must be performed collectively, due to the enriching process of discussion that takes place when analyzing the individual speeches, selecting key expressions, central ideas, anchors and, finally, when building the DCS itself. We therefore recommend that the analysis be carried out in pairs, rather than by a single researcher, to insure the validity and reliability of the analysis.

1.3 DCS and the use of software The step-by-step approach suggested here does not depend on the use of software. DCS can be adopted as a method of manually analyzing your research data, as 15

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

will be shown in the following pages. However, especially for large sample sizes, technology can be of great help in analyzing verbal qualitative data, including via DSC. Beginning in the 1980s, Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS) applications have been developed. This software has functionalities that make it possible to index, classify, and search data, improving the efficiency of coding and categorization, and allowing queries and results to be presented in more and more sophisticated ways. In addition to textual analysis, some software is capable of assisting in the analysis of images, audio, web pages, and geographic location, among others. Most of these software packages are paid (e.g., Alceste, ATLAS.ti, Dedoose, MAXQDA, NVivo, Quirkos, webQDA), however, some free applications include Iramuteq, Aquad, Cassandre, RQDA, and TAMS Analyzer. It is worth noting that decisions about the direction of the research, how to analyze the data, or how to code them are not made by the software, whose role is that of optimizing the researcher’s manual work (LAGE, 2011; COSTA; REIS; SOUZA, 2016; SOUZA et al., 2018).

The software that specifically employs the DCS technique is known as DSCsoft (formerly Qualiquantisoft), developed by the Institute for Research on the Discourse of the Collective Subject (IPDSC)2. DSCsoft is used to develop mixed methods studies, making it possible to create a database with the collected responses, and then classifying and grouping them to build the DCS. According to Carvalho (2016), the Lefèvre authors believe that the software provides acceptable and diverse results, both quantitative and qualitative, based on the responses and profiles of the interviewees. In addition, DSCsoft makes it possible to work with relatively large samples and offers the researcher a wide spectrum of categorized responses, plus more elaborate graphs and tables (CARVALHO, 2007).

The Institute for the Study of the Discourse of the Collective Subject (IPDSC, in Portuguese) is a private institution made up of researchers from the University of São Paulo (USP). To learn more, access: http://cpro2536.publiccloud. com.br/scp/index.php.

2

16

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

2

METHODOLOGICAL FIGURES: CONCEPT AND PRACTICE 17

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

18

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

To produce a DCS, it is necessary to be very clear about the methodological figures described below, because they will be the inputs used throughout the entire data analysis process:

2.1 Key Expression (KE) These are pieces or excerpts of a discourse that reveal the essence of its content, that is, they point to a central idea (CI) or to an anchor (AC). These excerpts from the individual speeches should be highlighted by the researcher in DAT 1, because they will make up the DCS itself at the end of the analyses (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005).

Note the example below (Table 1) taken from a survey on environmental perception in a community that has problems with basic sanitation, i.e., water supply, sewage, and garbage collection (BRITO, 2021). The question being analyzed is the following: What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?

In the key expressions column, each interviewee’s full answer to the above question was transcribed. The key expressions (KE) were highlighted by the researcher for later classification of the central idea(s) and anchor(s) present in each speech, if any (Table 1). The discourse of each interviewee may present more than one KE. These may correspond to a single central idea or to different ideas.

Table 1 – Examples of key expressions (in dark blue) excerpted from the transcribed verbatim speeches of an interview, in response to the question “What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?” I = interviewee code.

I

Key Expressions

13

“The government needs to take care of it because there are a lot of septic tanks.

There should be a project to know if the type of septic tank that we use is right, because sewage is the biggest problem here.”

26

“The government should provide a biodigester or evapotranspiration for the community because I believe this is the best way to deal with the community’s sewage.”

41

“Monitoring in order to force people to change their septic tanks and government resources to help the population that needs assistance.”

58

“Here there are few people and the septic tank is never full, understand? But, to solve the problem, there needs to be a project from the state government. If a sewage system is installed, where will it go? But I don’t know what would be better, there has to be an engineer to do it right, and Iphan needs to sign and authorize it.”

78*

“Each one should take care of their own sewage, right? Because if we wait for these politicians, they will never solve the problem, they only want to steal the people’s money.” *Fictitious interviewee and response.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

19

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

In order to practice a little, highlight the key expressions (KE) present in the statements below (Table 2), taken from the same study (BRITO, 2021) and adapted to better meet the purpose of this workbook. Remember that the same speech may contain more than one KE.

2.2 Central idea (CI) A central idea is a name or an expression that reveals, describes, and names, as synthetically and precisely as possible, the meaning(s) present in the homogeneous KEs of each response analyzed. The name or expression used in each CI can be taken Table 2 – Exercise to identify key expressions in the answers to the question “What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?” I = interviewee code.

I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

38

“There is no way to put a treatment unit here. The ideal would be for the individual treatment to be standardized.

The state should subsidize the research and give instructions on the replacement of the septic tanks and even help with the costs if they need it. The state needs to take ownership of what happens, right?”

67

“So, I believe that there is a law that says that when water is supplied, sewage has to be treated. To improve, I think that a sewage treatment system has to be built, because the land is already occupied, there is no more space for a septic tank and a drain. On this side we can’t because it is indigenous land. I think it should be done in the neighboring district to serve both localities.”

69

“We need alternatives that are appropriate for each situation, since we can’t have sewage treatment like in the city. We need to think of options that fit the physical space, because, for example, I would like to have an ecological septic tank, but my physical space doesn’t support it.”

70

“It’s hard to run pipes because of the terrain, I don’t know how it would be. If people were ethical enough to make proper septic tanks, there would be no need for the state to intervene.”

79

“Ah, I don’t think there’s any way to solve it. With this corrupt government in Brazil nothing will ever get done.

Only God can provide a solution.”

Anchors

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

20

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

literally from the KE itself, if it is short and expresses the CI efficiently or, if the researcher prefers, he or she can create an expression or name that best represents the CI. It is not mandatory to adopt a single pattern during the analysis.

The CI is like a classification or categorization of the highlighted KE, to assist in joining similar CIs in the Discourse Analysis Tool (DAT) later on. Therefore, the researcher does not necessarily need to create identical CIs to express similar ideas, because they will be grouped by affinity in the next phase of the DCS technique, even if their expressions/ names are not identical (LEFÈVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005; AZEVEDO; CHIARI; GOULART, 2013).

Observe in the example below (Table 3), adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021), the central ideas of the highlighted key expressions. The question analyzed is: What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?

Table 3 – Example of central ideas represented by the key expressions highlighted in dark blue from the individual speeches (column 2) answering the question “What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?” I = interviewee code.

I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

13

“The government needs to take care of it because there are a lot of septic tanks (KE of the 1st idea). There should be a project to know if the type of septic tank that we use is right (KE of the 2nd idea), because sewage is the biggest problem here.”

(1st idea) The State must act.

(2nd idea) Create projects to evaluate the septic tanks.

26

“The government should provide a biodigester or evapotranspiration for the community because I believe this is the best way to deal with the community’s sewage. ”

The State must act.

41

“Monitoring in order to force people to change their septic tanks and government resources to help the population that needs assistance.”

There must be monitoring.

58

“Here there are few people and the septic tank is never full, understand? But, to solve the problem, there needs to be a project from the state government (KE of the 1st idea). If a sewage system is installed, where will it go? But I don’t know what would be better, there has to be an engineer to do it right (KE of the 2nd idea), and Iphan needs to sign and authorize it.”

(1st idea) The State must act.

(2nd idea) Solution from trained professionals.

78*

“Each one should take care of their own sewage, right?

(KE of the 1st idea). Because if we wait for these politicians, they will never solve the problem, they only want to steal the people’s money (KE of the 2nd idea).”

(1st idea) Individual solution. nd (2 idea) A solution from the State is impossible.

* Fictitious interviewee and response.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

21

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

According to Lefèvre and Lefèvre (2005, p. 52), “[…] central ideas are descriptions of the meaning found in the key expressions and not the interpretation” of them. Note in Table 3 that, in the speeches coded as I13, I58, and I78, two central ideas were found in the same speech. This situation is common in DCS, and several central ideas can occur in the same individual speech. In this case, each KE was described by its own central idea, however, it is possible that more than one KE can be linked to a single CI. At this point, though, we will focus only on how to use the methodological figures.

Now, as an exercise, go back to Table 2 and identify or name the CI(s) for the KE that you identified and highlighted earlier.

2.3 Anchors (AC) Some KEs refer not only to a CI, but may also correspond to the linguistic manifestation of an ideology, theory, or generic belief, on which the enunciator relies to frame the specific situation investigated.

Considering that every expression is grounded in theories, hypotheses, and concepts, we can say that behind every discourse there is an anchor. However, the classification of a KE as an AC should only occur when the linguistic marks clearly express a generic ideology, so that the interpreter (researcher) does not run the risk of mistakenly classifying a KE as an anchor. That is, one can only classify a KE as an AC if it is concretely and explicitly present in the recorded statements (LEFÉVRE; LEFÈVRE, 2005; AZEVEDO; CHIARI; GOULART, 2013). For this reason, not all studies will necessarily find anchors in the interviewees’ discourses. And there is no pro-blem with that!

Using the same research mentioned for the previous methodological figures (BRITO, 2021), a fictitious verbal utterance, I78, was created to illustrate the occurrence of an anchor (Table 4). Remember that the question analyzed is: What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?

Table 4 – Example of an Anchor (column 4) for the Key Expressions highlighted in dark blue and underlined (column 2) as a response to the question “What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community?” I = interviewee code.

I

Key Expresions

Central Ideas

Anchors

78*

“Each one should take care of their own sewage, right? (KE of the 1st idea).

Because if we wait for these politicians, they will never solve the problem, they only want to steal the people’s money (KE of the 2nd idea).”

(1st idea) Individual solution.

(2nd idea) A solution from the State is impossible.

The sanitation problem cannot be solved because of the corruption of the politicians.

* Fictitious interviewee and response.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

22

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

When interviewee I78 states that, “politicians will never solve the problem, because they only want to steal the people’s money,” he answers the question by generalizing the idea that the lack of resolution of sanitation problems is solely linked to the corruption of Brazilian politicians.

In an article published by Lefèvre et al. (2002), the authors analyzed public health services based on anchors in order to produce a DCS (Table 5). One objective of the article is to emphasize this methodological figure by using it in practice.

Table 5 – Example Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) produced from an anchor.

Anchor

DCS of the Anchor

The service is slow because it is for the poor; if the person is rich, the service is fast and good.

It can’t be done: I mean, we who are poor suffer because of this. If I had... if we had money, then we would see a doctor immediately, everything would appear, service would be great. But since we don’t have money, it’s like this: “Let’s kick him to the curb, let’s let him make an appointment; schedule him for now? No, leave it for tomorrow,” understand? That’s how it is. So, it’s a suffering that we go through.

Source: Translated and adapted from Lefèvre et al. (2002, p. 39).

Go back to Table 2 again and see if any of the highlighted KEs refer to anchors.

If you identify any, insert in the corresponding column the generic idea presented in the statement.

2.4 Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) The DCS itself is the discourse-synthesis written in the first person singular and is made by joining key expressions that have the same meaning, that is, they are from similar or complementary central ideas (CI) or anchors (CA).

The DCS is elaborated using excerpts from all similar central ideas. As an example, considering only the data shown in Table 3, if the central ideas of interviewees I13, I26, and I41 were grouped as ideas having the same meaning, we could build a DCS to represent the CI of “Government Action,” as one of the answers to the question: What do you think should be done to improve basic sanitation in the community? (Table 6).

23

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 6 – Example of how the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) is constructed.

DCS A – Government Action The government needs to take care of it because there are a lot of septic tanks. In summary, there should be a project made by the state government, inspections should be made to force people to change their septic tanks, and government resources to provide for a biodigester or evapotranspiration. (I13, I26, I41, and I58) Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

Notice that, when constructing the DCS, connections were made to provide cohesion and make the text fluid and understandable. Details about the construction of the DCS will be explained later on. The codes at the end of the DCS represent the interviewees whose individual speeches contributed to make up the collective discourse.

Go back again to Table 2 and identify central ideas and anchors that have similar meanings, if any. Categorize the CIs using the same capital letter. For example, if the CIs identified in the speeches of subjects I13, I26, I41, and I58 are similar, identify them as category “A” and so on.

24

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

3

STEP-BY-STEP TO CREATE THE DCS 25

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

26

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Now that the concepts and functionalities of the methodological figures (key expression, central idea, and anchor) have been made clear, we will demonstrate a step-by-step procedure showing how to organize an analysis spreadsheet and build a DCS in practice. The analysis will be divided into two steps: Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT1) and Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT2).

Considering that the verbal data can be collected in a number of ways, before performing the first step, it is essential that all of the data collected in audio format already be transcribed and organized in an editable text file in order to proceed with the analyses, which should strictly follow the steps below:

3.1 First stage: Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1) 3.1.1 First step If the study has more than one question that is to be analyzed using the DCS technique, they should be analyzed separately. That is, if three questions were applied, we should analyze the answers from all interviewees to question 1, then analyze the answers of all interviewees to question 2, and finally, the answers to question 3. The order is not important.

After choosing the first question to be analyzed, we must create a file specifically for that question. Then, a table should be created with three columns named Key Expressions (column 1), Central Ideas (column 2), and Anchors (column 3). The content of each respondent’s answers to question 1 were copied in full into the Key Expressions column, as shown in Table 7. We suggest following the order of the interviewees, using a code or numbering system to identify them. The table used in this first phase of the analysis is known as Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1). In DAT 1, you will perform all of the preliminary analysis to identify the KEs, CIs, and ACs, if applicable.

Table 7 presents a model of DAT 1 with data from Brito’s research (2021) on environmental perception and sanitation, as per previous examples. Here, the question analyzed is the following: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

27

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 7 – Model of Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1) with statements fully transcribed in the second column. I = interviewee code.

I

Key Expressions

01

“Improvement of the public administration. The garbage could be collected daily and the way it is transported should be changed. It shouldn’t be by cart nor by boat because the garbage already falls into the river during the crossing.”

02

“Make changes to the place where it is deposited, because it is inadequate, and improve the frequency with which the garbage is removed from the houses... don’t cross the river, it should be taken by car.”

03

“People should separate their garbage and the collection should be more frequent.”

04

“The way it is picked up, both in relation to the truck that picks it up on the riverbank and the carts that shouldn’t pick it up. Also, the frequency with which it is collected.”

05

“To tell you the truth, I don’t think there is anything we can do to improve it. This selective collection and recycling is a big city thing.”

Central Ideas

Anchors

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

3.1.2 Second step After faithfully copying the transcription of all of the responses for the question to be analyzed to DAT I, the researcher must identify and mark the key expressions found in each one of them. This marking can be done using the graphic resource most convenient for the researcher, such as highlighting it with a color, underlining it, using boldface, etc. (Table 8).

28

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Table 8 – Model Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1) with key expressions highlighted in the second column. I = interviewee code.

Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

Central Ideas

I

Key Expressions

01

“Improvement of the public administration. The garbage could be collected daily and the way it is transported should be changed. It shouldn’t be by cart nor by boat because the garbage already falls into the river during the crossing.”

02

“Make changes to the place where it is deposited, because it is inadequate, and improve the frequency with which the garbage is removed from the houses... don’t cross the river, it should be taken by car.”

03

“People should separate their garbage and the collection should be more frequent.”

04

“The way it is picked up, both in relation to the truck that picks it up on the riverbank and the carts that shouldn’t pick it up. Also, the frequency with which it is collected.”

05

“To tell you the truth, I don’t think there is anything we can do to improve it. This selective collection and recycling is a big city thing.”

Anchors

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

When analyzing the data to identify the KEs, refer back to the question asked whenever necessary, in order to help identify the KEs more clearly. With longer, less concise answers, one runs the risk of getting lost amidst the countless bits of information contained in the statements. On the other hand, with very brief answers, be careful of the temptation to imagine that, due to being short, there is only one KE and, consequently, one CI. This is not always true. Beware of these misconceptions!

For this reason, it is always advisable to have someone else with you when applying the DCS technique.

To understand this better, let’s look at some fully transcribed speeches from an interview, as a response to the question “Do you currently like living in Caraíva?

Why?” (Table 9).

29

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 9 – Examples of long and short individual speeches. Interviews I01, I02, and I03 already have the key expressions (KE), central ideas (CI), and anchors (CA), if any, highlighted. For practice, identify the KEs in interviews I04 and I05. I = interviewee code.

Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? I

Key Expressions

01

“Yes, because within all these themes that we have dealt with, environmental and such, I believe that this is a place that is still very well preserved in relation to others (KE of 1st CI) despite all the problems, and I believe that this is a small place (KE of 2nd CI) that, with the tendency of the world today, which is to deal with micro culture, is a place that still manages to organize itself, to establish itself, and that the actions of the population itself, independent of the public power (KE of 2nd CI), organize the place to function in a nice way.”

02

“Yes, because it’s cool. No... because it’s a different place, a place without cars, that’s small... (KE of 1st CI) it is...

Caraíva is like a big family” (KE of 2nd CI).

03

“Yes. Ah... because when I arrived in Caraíva it was very... a quiet village, only natives, however, according to the growth of the people who arrived, visited the village, it began to bring progress that was also important for this community. This came with the security that still today this village is a place of tourism with respect (KE 1st CI). And we are still in constant dispute with... powerful people who want to come here to visit by helicopter, there are half a dozen people who fight to maintain this context (KE of 1st CI), although today it is no longer that peaceful village where we had that context of all being together” (KE of 2nd CI).

04

Central Ideas

“Yes... a lot! It is because... the place where we live is very quiet and... because everyone who comes from outside, wants to live in Caraíva... everyone is running around outside to stay here in Caraíva. How can I leave Caraíva to live somewhere else, you know? It’s a peaceful place and I like to live at my leisure, like I was born, you know?

I like to live loose, relaxed, like… wearing shorts, going fishing, going to the swamp, going for walks, teaching my classes, all that.”

30

Anchors

(1st idea) A preserved place.

(2nd idea) A small place that is able to organize.

(1st idea) A small place.

(2nd idea) A big family.

(1st idea) Actions of the residents to maintain the organization of tourism.

(2nd idea) Likes it, although it is no longer a quiet place.

It’s like a big family.

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

05

“Yes. Because it was the place where I was born and it is a beautiful place, a lovely place, a place that you enjoy, that you... where everything’s good... you have the river, you have the beach, you have the trees, you have the starry sky, you have the birds, you have... everything’s great.”

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

Notice that in statement I03, the KE identified and attributed to the 1st central idea was scattered, demonstrating that, in a statement, there can be several KEs for the same central idea, even if the KEs are not in sequence in the interviewee’s statement.

3.1.3 Third step After identifying the KEs of all the statements responding to the question under analysis, the next step is to identify the central ideas and anchors (if any) of each highlighted KE (Table 8). It’s important to remember that the same KE can refer to more than one CI. Therefore, when there is more than one CI, we suggest identifying the respective KEs as 1st idea, 2nd idea, 3rd idea, etc. This ordering refers only to the ideas taken from the same speech. Therefore, each interview analyzed that contains more than one CI receives a new ordering, as can be observed with I01, I02, I03, and I04 in Table 10.

31

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 10 – Model Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1) with key expressions highlighted in the second column, and central ideas identified in the third column. I = interviewee code.

Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

01

“Improvement in public administration (1st idea).

The garbage could be collected daily (2nd idea) and the way it is transported should change, which should not be with a cart, nor by boat (3rd idea), because the garbage has already fallen into the river when crossing.”

(1st idea) Improve public administration.

(2nd idea) Daily garbage collection. rd (3 idea) Change the way it is transported.

02

“The adequacy of the place where it is dumped (1st idea), because it is inadequate, and improve the frequency that garbage is picked up from the houses... (2nd idea) Don’t cross the river. It should be taken away by car (3rd idea).”

(1st idea) Adequate infrastructure. nd (2 idea) Improve the frequency of collection.

(3rd idea) Change the form of transportation.

03

“People should separate their garbage (1st idea) and the collection should be more frequent (2nd idea).”

(1st idea) Separation of garbage. nd (2 idea) Improve the frequency of collection.

04

“The way it is removed, both with regard to the truck that removes it at the edge of the river, and the carts that should not collect it (1st idea). Also, the frequency that it is collected (2nd idea).”

(1st idea) How garbage is removed and collected.

(2nd idea) Improve the frequency of collection.

05

“To tell you the truth, I think that there is nothing to do to improve. This selective collection and recycling is a big city thing.”

There is no solution; selective collection and recycling is a big city thing.

Anchors

Only big cities have selective collection and recycling.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

Note that the KE of interviewee I05 contains the central idea that there is no solution for the collection and disposal of garbage in the community, generalizing the idea that only large cities have their garbage collected and recycled properly. The KE from the I05 statements is highlighted in dark blue and underlined because that excerpt represents both the CI and the anchor.

Another important issue is the level of detail that the researcher wants or needs to obtain through the analyses. In the example shown in Table 10, almost all of the answers given by the interviewees are related to infrastructure. However, as we intend to understand in more detail how often these answers appear and which social 32

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

groups in the community mention them, we chose to add further detail to the CI classification.

Let’s reflect! Does the expression “improved public administration,” present in speech I01 (Table 10), represent an example of an anchor?

Possibly, yes, if the respondent was emphatic in stating that only the government could solve the solid waste problem of the community, as if there were no other actions that could resolve or mitigate the issues. In such a case, it might be possible to cogitate that this was a typical expression of an anchor. However, although the research subject used the above expression, he complemented the answer by citing what, in his opinion, could be improved by the State for the collection of garbage in the village.

Remember that an AC should only be classified as such when there is an explicit idea expressing a theory or ideology. That is, when the researcher has no doubt of the existence of the anchor.

3.1.4 Fourth step Remember in section 2.2 where it was mentioned that CIs are named without necessarily following a pattern or a single label? Now is the time to label and group the CIs and ACs (if any), considering those having equivalent or complementary meanings, and assigning them a classification according to the names given to them.

In the example in Table 11, we assigned a letter of the alphabet to each similar idea.

However, the researcher can make this identification by means of a color or any other resource that he or she finds most efficient.

Table 11 – Model of Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1), including the categorization of the central ideas. I = interviewee code.

Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

01

“Improvement in public administration (1st idea).

The garbage could be collected daily (2nd idea) and the way it is transported should change, which should not be with a cart, nor by boat (3rd idea), because the garbage has already fallen into the river when crossing.”

(1st idea) Improve public administration. A (2nd idea) Daily garbage collection. B rd (3 idea) Change the way it is transported. C

02

“The adequacy of the place where it is dumped (1st idea), because it is inadequate, and improve the frequency that garbage is picked up from the houses... (2nd idea) Don’t cross the river. It should be taken away by car (3rd idea).”

(1st idea) Adequate infrastructure. D nd (2 idea) Improve the frequency of collection. B (3rd idea) Change the form of transportation. C

33

Anchors

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 11 – Model of Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1), including the categorization of the central ideas. I = interviewee code.

Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

03

“People should separate their garbage (1st idea) and the collection should be more frequent (2nd idea).”

(1st idea) Separation of garbage. E nd (2 idea) Improve the frequency of collection. B

04

“The way it is removed, both with regard to the truck that removes it at the edge of the river, and the carts that should not collect it (1st idea). Also, the frequency that it is collected (2nd idea).”

(1st idea) How garbage is removed and collected. C (2nd idea) Improve the frequency of collection. B

05

“To tell you the truth, I think that there is nothing to do to improve. This selective collection and recycling is a big city thing.”

(1st idea) There is no solution; selective collection and recycling is a big city thing. F

Only big cities have selective collection and recycling. F

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

3.1.5 Fifth step For each group of central ideas and anchors categorized with the same code (A, B, C, D, or E) due to similarity of meaning, it is necessary to create a central idea that expresses the overall meaning of each group of ideas. The researcher can draw a phrase or an expression from the similar statements themselves that is able to synthesize the central idea of the group of ideas gathered, greatly facilitating the classification process. Alternatively, the researcher can create a name or an expression to synthesize the ideas present in the group of central ideas or anchors. To better understand this aspect, see Tables 12 and 13.

Table 12 – Categorization of central ideas (CI) for each group of similar initial CIs. I = interviewee code (a).

I

Central idea created for groups of similar CIs

Similar central ideas

01

A – Improve public administration.

Improve public administration.

01 02 03

Daily garbage collection.

Improve frequency of collection.

B – Improve the frequency of collection.

Improve frequency of collection.

04

Improve frequency of collection.

01

Change the form of transportation.

02

C – Change the form of transportation.

Change the form of transportation.

04

How garbage is removed and collected.

02

D – Improve the infrastructure.

Adequate infrastructure.

03

E – Separation of garbage by residents.

Separation of garbage by residents.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

34

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Table 13 – Anchor classification for each similar initial anchor group. I = interviewee code.

I 05

Anchor-synthesis

Only big cities have selective collection and recycling.

F – There is no solution; selective collection and recycling is a big city thing Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

3.2 Second stage: Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT 2) 3.2.1 First step After grouping the similar initial central ideas into a single CI, along with the anchors (if any), we should create a new analysis form called the Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT 2) for each one of them. This is where the DCS will be effectively elaborated.

In the example being used here, the following CI-syntheses and AC-synthesis were obtained, following the initial categorization: A – Improve public administration; B – Improve the frequency of collection; C – Change the form of transportation; D – Improve the infrastructure; E – Separation of garbage by residents; F – No solution because it is a small place (Anchor: F – Only big cities have selective collection and recycling).

In DAT 2, we suggest using a three-column table, where each interviewee’s code (column 1), key expressions (column 2), and DCS (column 3) will be arranged. Only the key expressions highlighted for the CI being analyzed at that moment should be inserted in the key expression column, according to the model shown in table 14.

35

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 14 – Discourse Analysis Tool 2, concerning the central idea B – Frequency of collection. I = interviewee code Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

I

Key-Expressions

DCS

01

The garbage could be collected daily.

02

Improve the frequency that garbage is picked up from the houses…

03

Collection should be more frequent.

04

Frequency that it is collected.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

3.2.2 Second step This is when the DCS for each group of central ideas is built. For this, the following is necessary: 1 – Put the KEs into a sequence, putting them in the best order to elaborate a DCS with a beginning, middle, and end, as occurs with any discourse having a logical flow.

Or, it is possible to start from the most general idea from the KEs and then get more specific. The idea is that, when composing the DCS, the KEs can be used in the order that best fits the discourse, according to the researcher’s analysis, and not necessarily in the order they are presented in the KE column in DAT 2; 2 – Whenever necessary, connectives should be inserted between sections of the discourse or paragraphs, such as: then, therefore, at last, however, nevertheless, soon, this way, etc., to provide cohesion and fluidity to the DCS. These connectives should not change the meaning of what was said by the interviewee, but only serve to unite and give more meaning to the discourse; 3 – If the KEs reveal information such as gender, age, an illness or life event etc., that may make it possible to identify the interviewees, these should be eliminated.

It’s important to remember that the idea of a DCS is to have a collective discourse, so any information that particularizes the discourse to a specific respondent will make it lose its character; 4 – The repetition of ideas should also be eliminated, but not when the same idea is expressed in different ways or with different words or expressions, even if they are similar; 5 – Remembering that each interviewee’s speech must be transcribed literally, meaning that mistakes in the use of formal language, language vices such as slang or foreign words, as well as discourse markers and interjections should be kept even

36

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

in the production of the DCS itself, as they are part of the essence of the population under study (Table 15); 6 – Finally, all the material that was selected in as a key expression in DAT 1 must be used.

Table 15 – Examples of expressions (underlined) that should be kept in the literal transcription of the speech.

Examples “Well, this ain’t too bad a problem.”

“You kidding?! This is the best place in the world. Like, you could go somewhere else, but...”

“Hell, it’s tough right now, isn’t it? We have to wake up.”

“Man, I think it’s cool, this idea to make more septic tanks.”

“Damn, I don’t know how to say what can be done. But this biodigester thing is awesome.”

Source: The authors (2021), with the kind collaboration of S. Kohlman-Rabbani.

We recommend keeping the codes that refer to the interviewees who contributed with individual speeches in the DAT 2 and also in the final presentation of the DCS, based on the key expressions selected by the researcher. The manner of presenting such codes is at the discretion of the researcher (an independent column in DAT 2, along or at the end of the DCS, such as a footnote, etc.). These codes make it possible to “track” each KE back from the DSC to the initial speeches obtained by the researcher.

This strategy ensures that the data analysis has greater transparency and reliability.

Table 16 contains an example of the composition of the DCS for central idea B – Improve the frequency of collection:

Table 16 – Discourse Analysis Tool 2, building the DSC for central idea B – Improve the frequency of collection. I = interviewee code.

Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

I

Expressões-Chave

DSC

01

The garbage could be collected daily.

02

Improve the frequency that garbage is picked up from the houses…

03

Collection should be more frequent.

04

Frequency that it is collected.

The frequency that it is collected (E04). The garbage could be collected daily (E01).

So, improve the frequency that garbage is picked up from the houses... (E02) Anyway, the collection should be more frequent (E03).

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

37

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

4

PRESENTATION OF THE DCS 39

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

40

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

The DCS can be presented in several ways. A summary table of all the central ideas recognized in the analyzed question (Table 17) can be presented first, before the tables or charts containing the DCSs of each central idea.

Table 17 - Synthesis of central ideas and anchors with the respective codes for the interviewees who were included in the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS).

Question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

Central Ideas

Interviewees

A – Improve public administration.

E01

B – Improve the frequency of collection.

E01, E02, E03 e E04

C – Change the form of transportation.

E01, E02 e E03

D – Improve the infrastructure.

E02

E – Separation of garbage by residents.

E03

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

The DCS is a technique that allows data of a qualitative nature to be quantified.

Therefore, the researcher can also quantitatively discuss the data from his study. The summary table can present a distribution of the percentages of interviewees for each answer (Table 18) or the distribution by social groups, according to the researcher’s needs and objectives (Table 19). For example: men and women, doctors and patients, age groups, companies and users, etc.

Table 18 - Distribution of answers by central idea/anchor (CI/AC) with the total frequency and calculation of percentages for each. Resp = total number of times the CI/AC appeared, considering a total of fifty fictitious interviewees.

Question

CI/AC

What do you think should be done to improve the collection and disposal of garbage in the community?

A – Improve public administration.

B – Improve the frequency of collection.

C – Change the form of transportation.

D – Improve the infrastructure.

E – Separation of garbage by residents.

F – Only big cities have selective collection and recycling.

Results Resp (n = 50)

%

10 40 30 10 10 10

20,00 80,00 60,00 20,00 20,00 20,00

Note: each interviewee may have referred to more than one central idea.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

41

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 19 - Distribution of the number of central ideas for the question: What do you think should be done to improve the collection/disposal of garbage in the community? NATIVE = local residents; NON-NATIVE = residents who are not local. Resp = total number of times the central idea/anchor (CI/AC) appeared in the individual speeches of each group.

Native (n = 27)

Central Ideas

Non-Native (n = 50)

Resp (n)

(%)

Resp (n)

(%)

A – Garbage should not be transported by river

3

11,11

14

28,00

B – Improve management performance

3

11,11

6

12,00

C – Implement selective collection

-

-

7

14,00

D – Sorting and recycling infrastructure in the village itself

1

3,70

7

14,00

E – Sorting and recycling infrastructure elsewhere

-

-

4

8,00

F – Frequency of collection

4

14,81

12

24,00

G – Storage

3

11,11

6

12,00

H – Don’t collect with horse-drawn carts, but with motorized vehicles

1

3,70

4

8,00

I – Other improvements in organization, information, and infrastructure

8

29,63

6

12,00

J – Awareness and information

6

22,22

17

34,00

K – Improve destination

2

7,41

1

2,00

L – No improvement necessary

3

11,11

3

6,00

M – Don’t know/Didn’t respond

7

25,93

8

16,00

Note: the speech of each interviewee may present more than one central idea.

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

Remember that each individual speech can have more than one CI? Because of this, the column “Resp” (Table 18) does not refer to the total number of respondents, but to how often the central ideas appear among the five respondents, meaning that the sum of the percentages will not result in 100%. In other words, among the fifty fictitious interviewees, 80% mentioned CI B – Improve the frequency of collection, 60% mentioned CI C – Change the form of transportation, and so on.

The same thing occurs in Table 19, whose frequency is calculated considering the number of native (n = 27) and non-native (n = 50) respondents.

42

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Furthermore, after identifying the frequency of CIs and ACs (if any), it is possible to create representative graphs. Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of the relative frequency for each central idea identified. The calculation was made considering the total number of answers, so the sum of the percentages will be 100%.

Remember that there is a DCS for each CI. Figure 1 – Model of a graph used to represent the percentage frequency of central ideas of a Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS), considering the total number of responses obtained. (Question: Is the way that CADRHU is given different from other courses?)

O modo como o CADRHU é dado é diferente dos outros Cursos?

35 30

%

34,83 29,21

25 20 15 10

11,24

12,36 8,99

5 0

3,37 Participação Aprendizagem Teoria/Prática

Crítica +

Crítica –

Outros

Idéias Centrais

Source: Lefèvre, Crestana and Cornetta (2003, p. 73).

In Table 20, The DCS for central idea B - Improve the frequency of collection, is presented. This model or a similar one can be used for all of the other CIs in our study. It is important to mention that the discourse does not need to be enclosed within quotation marks, because it is not a quotation. At the end of the DCS, the code for each interviewee whose individual discourse provided KEs used to build the discourse of the collective subject should be mentioned. This code is at the researcher’s discretion and can be more detailed, using, for example, an I for interviewee, a number indicating the interview sequence (01), gender (e.g., cis male, CM; trans female, TF; non-binary, NB etc.) and age, resulting in: I01TF29, I03CM49, etc. After composing all of the discourses from the central ideas and anchors (if any), the researcher can appropriately discuss the data presented, according to the theoretical reference adopted in the study.

43

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 20 – Presentation of a central idea (CI) and the corresponding discourse of the collective subject (DCS).

DSC IC B – Improve the frequency of collection The frequency with which it is collected. Garbage could be collected on a daily basis.

So, improve the frequency that garbage can be picked up from the houses...

In short, the collection should be more frequent. (E01, E02, E03, and E04) Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

In cases where the data set is very large, we recommend creating a file containing only the codes, to facilitate the correct citation of the interviewees in the DCS (Table 21). When building the DSC, it will only be necessary to copy and paste the codes at the end of the speech.

Table 21 – Code for respondents. I = interviewee code.

I

Gender

Age

Code

1

M

31

E01M31

2

M

38

E02M38

3

M

49

E03M49

4

M

39

E04M39

5

M

44

E05M44

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

4.1 Others ways to present the DCS As mentioned earlier, a DCS can be presented in several different ways, and the researcher is free to do so in a way that best suits the objectives of his or her study, as well as the norms of the journal to which he or she intends to submit it for publication. Below, we list some of the ways in which DCSs can be presented, based on previously published papers (Tables 22–26).

44

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Table 22 – Mode of a Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) presentation, organized by question and its respective central ideas.

Central idea and discourse of the collective subject of twenty elderly cancer patients. São Paulo, Brazil, 2001.

Have you ever participated or do you participate in any religious activity?

Central Idea (1) Yes, I do.

Discourse of the Collective Subject (1) Yes. I have my center. I preach from house to house and I also have meetings.

I go to mass on Sundays, and stuff like that. I have participated in a number of things, a member of youth with Christ, prayer group, yeah.

Central Idea (2) I have participated, but not currently.

Discourse of the Collective Subject (2) Currently I am not participating in any, but I have my faith there in the brothers’ church. Now I can hardly go out, but I have participated. For quite I while, I’ve thought first of taking care of myself, then of my neighbor... so we have to be well with God, to be able to take care of our neighbor. It is very difficult for me to read small print.

Central Idea (3) I don’t participate in religious activity.

Discourse of the Collective Subject (3) I don’t participate, no. I’m not part of any community. I’m not a churchgoer, I’m not frequent. I am kind of divorced, but I am Catholic, I used to go to church, I believe in God. I like religion. Eventually I resort to Christian thought.

Central Idea (4) In a pinch.

Discourse of the Collective Subject (4) I go there when I’m in a pinch.

Source: Translated and adapted from Teixeira and Lefèvre (2008, p. 1.252).

45

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 23 – Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) presentation model, organized by central idea and gender.

DCS B – Think it is right/would take it because of not knowing what you did or who the father is WOMEN I took the pill because I didn’t know what I had done. Because I wouldn’t know who the father was, because you never know who you’re getting involved with. If it was with any guy, you’d really have to take it, right? I would take it because I wouldn’t know my partner, I wouldn’t know his background.

Ah, if I didn’t remember, I think I would do the same. Maybe she did something at the dance and then she could get pregnant. Because if I don’t remember, I don’t know, if she had sex with several people, how will she know who the father of her child is? I would have taken the morning-after pill too, because then I would get a belly, without knowing who the father is? How would I do it, right?

If it was the same case as this, I would take it. If I had sex without a condom and in that case, I would take the pill yes, I wouldn’t know who the father was and it would be a big problem.

Source: Translated and adapted from Lefèvre et al. (2010, p. 804).

Table 24 – Model for presenting the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS), including the relative frequency of the central idea.

Central Idea

DCS 1

Initiation of Women into Freemasonry

Woman won’t save Masonry. Too much blah, blah, blah to make the illegitimate legitimate. This does not diminish our respect for sisters-in-law. I wouldn’t accept it! I’m not sexist. I think some things need to be clarified, before we fall into sexist discourse. It’s a simple fact, so say the landmarks, laws created to be respected. If we don’t follow them, we just become a little club. Freemasonry exists firm and strong by virtue of tradition. Respect our secular traditions.

Its pedagogical methodology is solar and phallic, applicable exclusively and effectively to the masculine nature. Women have an important role within the Masonic family, but initiation into the mysteries of the Order will never be allowed to them. And there are reasons for that. I’m sorry. So-called “mixed Masonry” is not Masonry. It is all spurious. It’s the same as if you dress as a fireman, buy a red car, but you are not a real fireman. Always a peaceful point, in regular freemasonry, initiation is exclusively for men. Live happily, outside of freemasonry Relative Frequency 39%

Source: Translated and adapted from Mota and Chaves Filho (2019, p. 41).

46

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Table 25 – Model for presenting the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) by incorporating it into the analysis of results, standardized similarly to a direct quotation, even though this is not the case, as explained in the text.

Analysis of results The analysis was done in light of the information collected during the study through semistructured interviews and participant observation with the key actors of the two experiences and data analysis performed using the discourse of the collective subject (DCS) qualitative research method.

Education zone for ecodevelopment The diagnosis of the current development situation in the analyzed community shows that there is a need for more integration among the actors (insufficient transportation networks, local markets with no communication among themselves, and little social participation). Faced with this reality, the need for continuity and integrated development to study reality and continue carrying out action and education projects for ecodevelopment is perceived.

Look, it’s very disunited, it’s very disunited, you think, calling people is complicated, so, to participate... In this case, meetings about the water, these things, it’s hard. The guy who works here at the waterworks goes from house to house, so he is very communicative about this. And even so, people are not interested in participating, right? (DCS 1).

The focus of the tacit knowledge of the experts and the local cultural knowledge of the community based on observation and life practice begins from existence itself.

Source: Translated and adapted from Alcântara, Sampaio, and Zabala (2018, p. 905–906).

Table 26 – Example of a DCS originally presented in English, resulting from a study conducted at a hospital in southern Brazil.

The body manifesting thirst In the first category, the patient reported intense and remarkable body changes related to thirst in the perioperative period. Dry mouth, dry and chapped lips, perception of changes in saliva and in the texture of the tongue, sensation of suffocation, and weakness compose a scenario of discomfort that is promptly identified by patients: Well, it seems like everything went dry, you know? Dry mouth and lips, as if they were about to crack, the tongue was kind of thick, coated. I can’t explain. The saliva gets thick and tastes bad. There is no saliva to swallow.

Your breath sometimes changes, the flavor saliva seems to change flavor, you know... I think it gets thicker and bitterer. Then I noticed my throat was dry. We get a bit suffocated, there is no liquid. It seems like nothing slides, no saliva, no nothing. My body urged for water, it was weak, as if it were drying.

(E2, E3, E4, E6, E7, E9, E10, E11, E14) Source: Adapted from Silva, Aroni, and Fonseca (2016, p. 77).

A challenge lies in how to present a DCS and maintain the essence of the technique in a language other than the one in which the initial speeches are obtained.

47

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

This is because the DCS seeks to keep these initial speeches as true as possible to the manner they are expressed to the researcher. However, when translating DCSs into other languages, this can be lost, to varying degrees. In the current version of this study, we recognize this limitation, because the original discourses shown in the tables were produced by Brazilians, native speakers of Portuguese. During the process of translating these speeches into English, it is impossible to reliably maintain all of the characteristics and particularities of the individuals’ manners of speaking.

A possible solution to minimize this loss is to present the translated DCS, but, in addition, include the speeches in the original language in which they were produced somewhere in the publication. This can be done, for example, as a footnote, endnote, or as supplementary material, a tool made available today by many journals that maintain electronic versions. In addition, the researcher has the option of depositing the original speeches into an online repository and mentioning the address to access them in the publication. Facilitating access to original research data is a worldwide trend in scholarly communication, along with other initiatives that value open science. For the present study, the reader can consult the original speeches in the Portuguese version3.

3 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350715321_Discurso_do_sujeito_coletivo_na_pratica

48

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

5

A LITTLE MORE PRACTICE 49

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Now that you have grasped the functionality of the methodological figures and how to use DAT 1 and DAT 2, we will go back to the examples used previously so that you can label the CIs and ACs using the same letters of the alphabet for those having similar meanings. After this, create a CI for each group of similar ideas found (Table 27). Finally, construct the DCS with the highlighted KEs for each group of CIs identified (Table 28).

We have also included an extra set of dummy data for you to practice the stepby-step DCS procedure a bit more, starting from Discourse Analysis Tools 1 and 2 (Tables 29 and 30).

We hope that this book will help you conduct qualitative verbal data analysis with more rigor and in a more systematic way. If you have any suggestions for improving this material, please contact the authors and send us your comments. We will be glad to consider them in future editions.

Enjoy your studies!

Table 27 – Activity to practice identifying the central ideas (CI) and anchors (CA) of statements I04 and I05, simulating DAT 1, remembering that you highlighted the key expressions (KE) of these interviews in Table 9. After this, label all of the CIs/ACs found in Discourse Analysis Tool I (DAT 1) below using letters of the alphabet, and finally, give a name to each group of similar ideas.

I = Interviewee code.

Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

“Yes, because within all these themes that we have dealt with, environmental and such, I believe that this is a place that is still very well preserved in relation to others (KE of 1st CI) despite all the problems, and I believe that this is a small place (KE of 2nd CI) that, with the tendency of the world today, which is to 01 deal with micro culture, is a place that still manages to organize itself, to establish itself, and that the actions of the population itself, independent of the public power (KE of 2nd CI), organize the place to function in a nice way.”

02

“Yes, because it’s cool. No... because it’s a different place, a place without cars, that’s small... (KE of 1st CI) it is...

Caraíva is like a big family” (KE of 2nd CI).

51

Anchors

(1st idea) A preserved place.

(2nd idea) A small place that is able to organize.

(1st idea) A small place.

(2nd idea) A big family

It’s like a big family

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 27 – Activity to practice identifying the central ideas (CI) and anchors (CA) of statements I04 and I05, simulating DAT 1, remembering that you highlighted the key expressions (KE) of these interviews in Table 9. After this, label all of the CIs/ACs found in Discourse Analysis Tool I (DAT 1) below using letters of the alphabet, and finally, give a name to each group of similar ideas.

I = Interviewee code.

Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

“Yes. Ah... because when I arrived in Caraíva it was very... a quiet village, only natives, however, according to the growth of the people who arrived, visited the village, it began to bring progress that was also important for this community. This came with the security that still today this village is a place of 03 tourism with respect (KE 1st CI). And we are still in constant dispute with... powerful people who want to come here to visit by helicopter, there are half a dozen people who fight to maintain this context (KE of 1st CI), although today it is no longer that peaceful village where we had that context of all being together” (KE of 2nd CI).

Anchors

(1st idea) Actions of the residents to maintain the organization of tourism.

(2nd idea) Likes it, although it is no longer a quiet place.

Table 27 – Activity to practice identifying the central ideas (CI) and anchors (CA) of statements I04 and I05, simulating DAT 1, remembering that you highlighted the key expressions (KE) of these interviews in Table 9. After this, label all of the CIs/ACs found in Discourse Analysis Tool I (DAT 1) below using letters of the alphabet, and finally, give a name to each group of similar ideas.

I = Interviewee code.

Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? I

Key Expressions

Central Ideas

04

“Yes... a lot! it is because... the place where we live is very quiet and... because everyone who comes from outside, wants to live in Caraíva... everyone is running around outside to stay here in Caraíva. How can I leave Caraíva to live somewhere else, you know? It’s a peaceful place and I like to live at my leisure, like I was born, you know? I like to live loose, relaxed, like… wearing shorts, going fishing, going to the swamp, going for walks, teaching my classes, all that.”

“Yes. Because it was the place where I was born and it is a beautiful place, a lovely place, a place that you enjoy, that you...

05 where everything’s good... you have the river, you have the beach, you have the trees, you have the starry sky, you have the birds, you have... everything’s great.”

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

52

Anchors

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Table 28 – Activity to practice constructing the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS), simulating Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT 2). Use the DAT 2 below to insert the name of each group of similar central ideas/anchors (CI/AC) found in DAT 1 (Table 27), then transfer the key expressions (KE) from each interviewee to produce the DCS, adding or removing lines according to the needs of your analysis. I = Interviewee code DAT 2 – Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? CI ___ – I

Key Expressions

DCS

DAT 2 – Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? CI ___ – E

Key Expressions

DCS

DAT 2 – Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? CI ___ – I

Key Expressions

DCS

DAT 2 – Question: Do you currently like living in Caraíva? Why? CI ___ – I

Key Expressions

DCS

Source: Translated and adapted from Brito, Lauer-Leite and Novais (2021).

53

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

Table 29 – Data set for Discourse Analysis Tool 1 (DAT 1), including responses from six interviewees to the following question: “What do you think of the current state of Brazilian politics?”. I = Interviewee code Central Ideas

I

Key Expressions

01

“Look, it’s very complicated, see! I don’t like politics, I get upset when I talk about politics.”

02

“I really fight, you know. I have no patience when I talk to my family about voting. They don’t understand. Oh, stupid people…”

03

“Brazil is a complicated country, man. People don’t know how to vote.

Year in, year out, and everything stays the same. I’ve already lost hope that anything will change.”

04

“Politicians are all crooks! I don’t trust anyone who gets involved in politics. Today I don’t even go vote anymore.

What for? Waste of my time….”

05

“Sweetie, something has to be done about this politics thing. The people suffer so much and these politicians don’t care about us. They need to look at all the suffering in this country. That’s how I think.”

06

“We see so many things wrong, but I don’t think it’s everyone, you know? There are many good people making a difference in politics. But, unfortunately, we only value what’s no good. We don’t value those who do good things. But I have a conscience, nobody buys my vote.”

Anchors

Source: The authors (2021).

Table 30 – After highlighting the key expressions (KE) determining the central ideas (CI) and anchors (AC), if any, and classifying them in the DAT 1 presented in Table 29, complete Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT 2) and build the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) for each CI or AC identified. I = Interviewee.

DAT 2 – Question: “What do you think of the current state of Brazilian politics?”

CI ___ – I

Key Expressions

DCS

CI ___ –

54

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

Table 30 – After highlighting the key expressions (KE) determining the central ideas (CI) and anchors (AC), if any, and classifying them in the DAT 1 presented in Table 29, complete Discourse Analysis Tool 2 (DAT 2) and build the Discourse of the Collective Subject (DCS) for each CI or AC identified. I = Interviewee.

DAT 2 – Question: “What do you think of the current state of Brazilian politics?”

I

Key Expressions

DCS

CI ___ – I

Key Expressions

DCS

CI ___ – I

Key Expressions

DCS

Source: The authors (2021).

55

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

ABOUT US Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito She has an undergraduate degree in Languages from the University of the State of Bahia (UNEB) and a Master’s degree in Environmental Sciences and Technologies from the Federal University of Southern Bahia and the Federal Institute of Bahia (IFBA). She is an administrative technician at the IFBA working in finances. Although not directly related to her professional activity, she is interested in research that interfaces with the environment and society and, since 2019, she is part of the study group MIRIM – Children, Childhoods, and Nature. During her master’s degree, she had the opportunity to get to know and become fond of using DCS to analyze verbal data, fruits of the environmental perception research conducted in the community of Caraíva, in the extreme south of Bahia.

Iani Dias Lauer Leite She has a bachelor’s degree in Administration, and a master’s degree and doctorate in Psychology (Theory and Research of Behavior) from the Federal University of Pará (UFPA). She is a professor at the University Federal of Western Pará (UFOPA), where she coordinates the Research Laboratory for Children and Infants in the Amazon (LAPCIA). She supervises undergraduate and graduate students in Society, Environment and Quality of Life, and in Education, both at UFOPA. Her topics of interest are: connecting children with nature, well-being and quality of life, music therapy, and dance therapy.

Jaílson Santos de Novais He has an undergraduate degree in Biological Sciences and a master’s degree in Sciences (Botany) from the Bahia State University at Feira de Santana (UEFS), and a PhD in Biological Sciences (Botany) from the National Institute for Amazon Research (INPA). He is a professor at the Federal University of Southern Bahia (UFSB), where he coordinates the study group MIRIM – Children, Childhoods, and Nature, linked to the Floras Botanical Garden. In addition, he also provides guidance to undergraduate and graduate students, while teaching in the postgraduate programs in Environmental Sciences and Technologies (UFSB/IFBA) and in Society, Environment, and Quality of Life, the latter at the Federal University of Western Pará (UFOPA). His research interests include people–environment studies, especially on the child– nature connection, science/botany education, and the study of pollen grains (palynology, a subarea of botany).

57

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

REFERENCES ABRIC, Jean-Claude. Prácticas sociales y representaciones. México: Coyoacán, 2001.

ALCÂNTARA, Liliane Cristine Schlemer; SAMPAIO, Carlos Alberto Cioce; ZABALA, Leire Uriarte. Análise socioambiental: zona de educação para ecodesenvolvimento e experiência cooperativa de Mondragón.

Revista Sociedade e Estado, Brasília, v. 33, n. 3, p. 887–914, 2018. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0102-6992-201833030010.

BRITO, Joscélia Monteiro Santos de. Percepção sobre saneamento ambiental: um estudo de caso na Vila Histórica de Caraíva, Porto Seguro – BA. 2021. 194 f. Dissertation (Master’s in Environmental Science and Technologies) – Universidade Federal do Sul da Bahia; Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia da Bahia, Porto Seguro, 2021.

BRITO, Joscélia Monteiro Santos de; LAUER-LEITE, Iani Dias; NOVAIS, Jaílson Santos de. Discurso do sujeito coletivo na prática. Porto Seguro: UFSB, 2021. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/350715321_Discurso_do_sujeito_coletivo_na_pratica. Access on 28 May 2021.

CARVALHO, Luzia Alves de. Metodologia qualitativa em pesquisa sobre formação de professores: narração de uma experiência. Perspectivas online, Campos dos Goytacazes, v. 1, n. 4, 9–24, 2007.

CARVALHO, Simone Alves de. O uso da metodologia discurso do sujeito coletivo (DSC) nas pesquisas com interface entre comunicação e saúde. In: SIMPÓSIO DO PENSAMENTO COMPUTACIONAL BRASILEIRO, 3., 2016, São Paulo. Anais [...]. São Paulo: Intercom; SESC; Umesp, 2016. Available at: https://www. portalintercom.org.br/anais/pensacom2016/textos/simone-carvalho.pdf. Access on: 29 July 2020.

COSTA-MARINHO, Mary Lucia. O discurso do sujeito coletivo: uma abordagem qualiquantitativa para a pesquisa social. Trabajo Social Global: Revista de Investigaciones en Intervención Social, Granada, v. 5, n. 8, p.

90–115, 2015. DOI https://doi.org/10.30827/tsg-gsw.v5i8.3093.

FIGUEIREDO, Marília Z. A., CHIARI, Brasília M., GOULART, Bárbara N. G. de. Discurso do Sujeito Coletivo: uma breve introdução à ferramenta de pesquisa qualiquantitativa. Distúrbios da Comunicação, São Paulo, v. 25, n. 1, 129–136, 2013.

JODELET, Denise. Representações sociais: um domínio em expansão. In: JODELET, Denise (org.). As representações sociais. Trad. Lilian Ulup. Rio de Janeiro: UERJ, 2010. p. 17–44.

LAGE, Maria Campos. Os softwares tipo CAQDAS e a sua contribuição para a pesquisa qualitativa em educação.

ETD – Educação Temática Digital, Campinas, v. 12, n. 2, p. 42–58, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20396/etd.v12i2.1187.

LEFÈVRE, Ana Maria Cavalcanti; CRESTANA, Maria Fazanelli; CORNETTA, Vitória Kedy. A utilização da metodologia do discurso do sujeito coletivo na avaliação qualitativa dos cursos de especialização “Capacitação e Desenvolvimento de Recursos Humanos em Saúde-CADRHU”, São Paulo – 2002. Saúde e Sociedade, São Paulo, v. 12, n. 2, p. 68–75, 2003. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902003000200007.

LEFÈVRE, Fernando; LEFÈVRE, Ana Maria Cavalcanti. O discurso do sujeito coletivo: um novo enfoque em pesquisa qualitativa (desdobramentos). 2. ed. Caxias do Sul: EDUCS, 2005. p. 13–57.

LEFÈVRE, Fernando; LEFÈVRE, Ana Maria Cavalcanti. O sujeito que fala. Interface – Comunicação, Saúde, Educação, São Paulo, v. 10, n. 20, p. 517–524, 2006. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S14143283200600020001.

LEFÈVRE, Fernando; LEFÈVRE, Ana Maria Cavalcanti. Discurso do sujeito coletivo: Representações sociais e intervenções comunicativas. Texto & Contexto – Enfermagem, Florianópolis, v. 23, n. 2, p. 502–507, 2014.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-07072014000000014.

LEFÈVRE, Fernando; LEFÈVRE, Ana Maria Cavalcanti; CARDOSO, Maria Rosa Logiodice; MAZZA, Márcia Maria Porto Rossetto. Assistência pública a saúde no Brasil: estudo de seis ancoragens. Saúde e Sociedade, São Paulo, v. 11, n. 2, p. 35–47, 2002. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902002000200004.

59

Joscélia Monteiro Santos de Brito | Iani Dias Lauer-Leite | Jaílson Santos de Novais

60

Discourse of the Collective Subject in Practice

LEFÈVRE, Fernando; LEFÈVRE, Ana Maria Cavalcanti; CORNETTA, Vitoria Kedy; ARAÚJO, Sandra Dircinha Teixeira de. O discurso do sujeito coletivo como eu ampliado: aplicando a proposta em pesquisa sobre a pílula do dia seguinte. Revista Brasileira de Crescimento e Desenvolvimento Humano, Santo André, v. 20, n. 3, 798–808, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.19988.

MOSCOVICI, Serge. Representações sociais: investigações em psicologia social. Trad. Pedrinho A. Guareschi. 5. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Vozes, 2007.

MOTA, Diego; CHAVES FILHO, Cloves Gregório. Uma questão polarizada nas mídias sociais: discursos sobre a iniciação de mulheres na maçonaria. C&M – Ciência & Maçonaria, Brasília, v. 6, n. 1, p. 35–45, 2019.

OLIVERIA, Silvia Ximenes; OLIVEIRA, Moisés Barbosa; CAMBOIM, Francisca Elidivânia de Farias; NÓBREGA, Maria Mirtes Sá; LIMA, Adalmira Batista, MELO Aristeia Candeia de. Teoria das representações sociais e o discurso do sujeito coletivo como ferramentas para o desenvolvimento de pesquisas qualitativas. Temas em Saúde, João Pessoa, edição especial, p. 126–135, 2018.

ORTIZ, Renato (org.). A sociologia de Pierre Bourdieu. São Paulo: Olho d’Água, 2013.

REIS, Luís. Paulo; COSTA, António Pedro; SOUZA, Franscinê Neri de. Análise Comparativa de Pacotes de Software de Análise de Dados Qualitativos. In: CONFERÊNCIA IBÉRICA DE SISTEMAS E TECNOLOGIAS DE INFORMAÇÃO. Gran Canária, Espanha. Anais [...]. Gran Canária: AISTI – Associação Ibérica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informação, 2016. p. 998–1003.

SILVA, Larissa Cristina Jacovenco Rosa da; ARONI, Patricia; FONSECA, Lígia Fahl. I am thirsty! Experience of the surgical patient in the perioperative period. Revista SOBECC, São Paulo, v. 20, n. 2, p. 75–81, 2016. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5327/Z1414-4425201600020003.

SOUZA, Marli Aparecida Rocha de; WALL, Marilene Loewen; THULER, Andrea Cristina de Morais Chaves; LOWEN, Ingrid Margareth Voth; PERES, Aida Maris. O uso do software IRAMUTEQ na análise de dados em pesquisas qualitativas. Revista Escola de Enfermagem USP, São Paulo, 2018.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-220X2017015003353.

TEIXEIRA, Jorge Juarez Vieira; LEFÈVRE, Fernando. Significado da intervenção médica e da fé religiosa para o paciente idoso com câncer. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, Rio de Janeiro, v. 13, n. 4, p. 1.247–1.256, 2008. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232008000400021.

61