This dissertation was a discourse analysis study, drawing upon discursive psychology, poststructural understandings of discourse, conversation analysis, and a social relational model of disability. The purpose of this study was to explore how autism was performed as an interactional event among children with autism labels, the therapists who work with them, and their parents, in the context of a pediatric therapy setting. I interrogated how the participants’ everyday discursive practices were shaped and, at times, constrained by the social and political institutions that often work to define autism and the related, official plans of treatment. A total of 12 families agreed to participate, resulting in the participation of 12 children with autism labels, three to 11 years of age, six fathers, and 11 mothers. The participants included three speech therapists, two occupational therapists, one physical therapist, one teacher/social group facilitator, and one medical secretary/sibling support group facilitator. Data sources included conversational data from the therapy sessions of the participating children and their therapists, 14 parent interviews, eight therapist interviews, documents used within the therapy sessions, demographic surveys/information from the participating therapists and parents, and two interviews with a state advocate and clinical directors focused on qualifying for services. Findings from the interview data highlighted the varied meanings and performances of autism, while pointing to the related political and social conditions that make the naming and treating of autism (im)possible. Findings drawn from the therapy session data pointed to how the participants’ discursive practices worked to reframe “behaviors of concern,” and to transgress normative communication patterns. The following conclusions were drawn from the findings: (a) autism, as a construct, remains open to multiple meanings, while being inextricably linked to institutionalized practices; (b) in therapy talk, therapists and children with autism labels often co-construct alternative accounts of problematic behaviors; and (c) therapy talk can function to reframe non-normative communication and behavioral patterns, expanding what is constructed as “acceptable.” The findings point to the complexities of defining and performing autism labels, and highlight the ways in which therapy talk can function to reframe behaviors and communication patterns presumed to be pathological.

Teacher effectiveness has been a rallying cry for education reform over the last decade. The push for policies that aim to increase teacher effectiveness, fire ineffective teachers and recruit or retain effective teachers unite educational stakeholders; yet, specific, operational definitions of effectiveness remain elusive and divisive. It is easy to say that teacher effectiveness is the single most important factor in student achievement, but difficult to say what it means to be effective. In this study I take up a Critical Discursive Psychology (Wetherell, 1998) approach to the text of the current Framework for Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth in Tennessee and the talk of the Teacher Evaluation Advisory Committee (TEAC)– a 15-member committee appointed to craft a new evaluation policy with Race To The Top funds under the First To the Top Act. My findings suggest that there are polarized interpretative repertoires available for talking and making sense of effectiveness in teaching. These ways of talking about teaching create conflicts and dilemmas within conversations that are managed in patterned ways. Within the talk of the TEAC, patterns in the way dilemmas are managed within conversations include evading and dividing decisions points in ways that support a self-extending system of education reform. My findings suggest that teacher effectiveness is constantly being constructed within conversations, rather than being a single idea that can be singularly and authoritatively defined and handed down. As such I argue that teacher effectiveness policies must purposefully engage individuals at all levels of policy and practice in ongoing conversations about effectiveness in teaching and the evaluation of teaching in order to mediate the unintended consequences of tools for evaluation, and to develop a shared vision of excellence for collaborative progress.

This is an empirical study of how the mathematical talk of adult learners constructs/reconstructs different mathematical discourses. The study is to be regarded as an attempt to develop a discursive approach within the field of mathematics education and to complicate the status of mathematics in education and in society in general. My theoretical underpinnings consist of three possible mathematical discourses – coercive, regulative and emancipative mathematics. From a discursive psychology perspective, I let these discourses function as analytical interpretive repertoires in relation to the adult learners’ rhetorical use of mathematics and their claiming of mathematical subject-positions, named the coerced, the self-regulating and the responsible mathematician. The conclusions are concentrated around a discussion about the rhetorical turn of adult mathematics in which I focus on mathematics and its relation to the becoming of the self-regulating subject. I continue by arguing that a focus on how the participants deal with mathematics, rather than how they learn mathematics, can generate new perspectives on the teaching praxis of mathematics education.

Previous research on cosmetic surgery and teenage girls is limited and fails to provide information regarding how teenage girls construct these procedures. A social constructionist approach informed by a discursive psychology methodology was used to study how teenage girls and message board respondents construct cosmetic surgery through the language they use and the social actions performed through their talk. I analyzed questions posted by teenage girls between the ages of 13 to 19 on online message boards, as well as responses to these questions posted by other message board users. Social actions identified in the teenage girls talk included: advice and information seeking, approval seeking, and justification of cosmetic surgery. Social actions identified in the respondents talk included: provision of advice and information, warning, approval, disapproval, criticism and judgement, reassurance, empathy, encouragement, and support. In general, teenage girls constructed cosmetic surgery as a way for them to feel better about themselves, as a way for them to feel better about the body part they were seeking surgery for, and as a way for them to fit in and be accepted by others. The results of this study are discussed in relation to the existing research on teenage girls and cosmetic surgery, Daviss (1995) feminist perspective on cosmetic surgery, Fredrickson and Robertss (1997) objectification theory, and embodiment. Implications for teenage girls, parents of teenage girls, physicians, and psychologists are also discussed, and recommendations for future research are suggested.

Previous research on cosmetic surgery and teenage girls is limited and fails to provide information regarding how teenage girls construct these procedures. A social constructionist approach informed by a discursive psychology methodology was used to study how teenage girls and message board respondents construct cosmetic surgery through the language they use and the social actions performed through their talk. I analyzed questions posted by teenage girls between the ages of 13 to 19 on online message boards, as well as responses to these questions posted by other message board users. Social actions identified in the teenage girls talk included: advice and information seeking, approval seeking, and justification of cosmetic surgery. Social actions identified in the respondents talk included: provision of advice and information, warning, approval, disapproval, criticism and judgement, reassurance, empathy, encouragement, and support. In general, teenage girls constructed cosmetic surgery as a way for them to feel better about themselves, as a way for them to feel better about the body part they were seeking surgery for, and as a way for them to fit in and be accepted by others. The results of this study are discussed in relation to the existing research on teenage girls and cosmetic surgery, Daviss (1995) feminist perspective on cosmetic surgery, Fredrickson and Robertss (1997) objectification theory, and embodiment. Implications for teenage girls, parents of teenage girls, physicians, and psychologists are also discussed, and recommendations for future research are suggested.

The aim of this paper is to study whether the way directioners (One Direction fans) on Twitter express self-understandings denote fandom as a sacred experience. For this purpose, the data was analyzed in relation to Nicholas Jay Demerath III typology of the varieties of the sacred experience. The method used was discursive psychology. The data was analyzed by how the fans draw the line between “us” and “them”, when expressing their self-understandings and their position in relation to others.   Five themes were identified: (1) positioning and demarcation for membership, (2) group identity, (3) conflict, (4) the norms for behavior, opinions and language and (5) the group’s role and function. The directioners were using three interpretative repertoires; the One Direction fandom as identity, lifestyle and therapy.   The conclusion when analyzing the data in relation to Demeraths typology was that directioners expressed notions of the One Direction fandom as a sacred experience in an integrative manner, that is, being a “directioner” was described as marginal and confirmatory.  This suggests that the One Direction fandom consists of people that are outside the mainstream who are brought in to a social unit by joining the fandom. The data also contradicts this; the high demands for directioners to be active on Twitter can create an unsafe community.   Being in the One Direction fandom can be a possible source for a sacred experience as experienced consequences since it has given the fans identity, improved their lives and helped them escape reality. The experience of the sacred varies depending on the devotion of the fans.

This thesis presents a critical analysis of the dilemmas of doing a PhD in the social sciences from the perspective of discursive psychology. It aims to contribute to qualitative studies of higher education, especially work in the sociology of education on social science doctoral research and training, and discourse analytic work on the dilemmas of education. It argues that there is a crucial bias in the literature on doctoral study. Much of the theory and research on doing a doctorate has been written and carried out by doctoral supervisors and established academic researchers, rather than doctoral students themselves. As a result, researchers have tended to study supervisor rather than student dilemmas and have left certain gaps in their studies, including the experiential dimensions of doctoral research, the discursive construction of postgraduate identities, and the patterns of ideology and power at play in doctoral student life. The present doctorate on doing a doctorate attempts to fill in these gaps, and at the same time introduces a distinctive critical, discursive, and reflexive take on postgraduate education. Detailed discourse analyses are carried out of in-depth semistructured interviews with PhD students in various psychology and social science departments in the United Kingdom. The analysis pays attention to the conversational, rhetorical, and ideological patterning of doctoral postgraduate discourse. In particular, it concerns the academic identity work done by the postgraduates, the ways in which they manage particular interactional, selfpresentational, and ideological dilemmas in their talk, and the different forms of power that are at play as they carry out their doctorates. In addition, a form of practical, analytic reflexivity is developed in the thesis, whereby the authors' own methodological and interviewing practices are analysed, along with text of the thesis itself. The general argument is that the topic of postgraduate academic identity proves a good case study for the investigation of some of the hidden dynamics of power, as well as the use of wider ideological values, in the construction of identities in contemporary institutional settings.

This thesis takes Discursive Psychology as its main theoretical influence. Drawing on the resources of Discursive Psychology and utilising analytic tools provided by Conversation Analysis, these principles are applied to the study of addiction, and specifically alcohol problems. The data explored are telephone calls to an alcohol helpline. Four analytic chapters are presented. The first focuses on the concept of loss of control over drinking, identifying features of how this concept is constructed in talk and suggests possible functions of control talk for both callers and Advice Workers. The second analytic chapter examines how Advice Workers respond to callers' professed impaired control over their drinking and I demonstrate that embedded in discursive sequences of problem formulation and advice giving are issues of agency, accountability and responsibility. The thesis moves on to explore the role of knowledge in calls to an alcohol helpline and the analysis reveals that both the expert status of the Advice Worker and the speciality of the topic are co-constructed between the speakers on the helpline. The final analytic chapter features just one telephone call and demonstrates the application of such an analysis for alcohol service providers. The thesis ends with a discussion of the main overall findings and the implications of the research for clinical practice. I close by arguing that initial agency contact is a very important site of study and recommend that this should be explored utilising naturally-occurring talk.

This thesis is an investigation of talk in a therapeutic setting. It takes discursive psychology as the main influence theoretically, and also draws on the rigorous analytical techniques of conversation analysis (CA). The data was collected in various family therapy settings in the U.K., both residential and non-residential videotapes made during those sessions These recordings were made by therapists for their own use initially, and were not produced especially for this project. Videotapes were transcribed according to standard CA conventions, and subsequently analysed. One of the primary research questions has been to examine empirically mental state language as used in the therapeutic setting. Secondly, it has been to examine accounting practices and the production of versions of events as 'fact'. Thirdly, the aim has been to consider the practical implications of asymmetry as a participants' concern. As a unifying and over-arching analytic interest the use of reported speech in each of these other aspects has been investigated to assess its role in their production. The conclusions of the thesis demonstrate that participants themselves orient to one another's minds as accessible and reportable entities, and that speech is treated as reflective of inner thought. Furthermore, where speech is reported in the therapeutic setting, it is frequently used to validate and to evidence claims about other people's 'psyche'.

This thesis takes a discursive/rhetorical approach to the topic of support for modern constitutional monarchy. It examines in detail some of the rhetorical devices used by modern Japanese speakers when they discuss monarchism. In so doing the thesis highlights both the discursive and social dilemmas involved in contemporary monarchism. In Britain, another constitutional monarchical state, critical psychologists have analysed what have been called 'dilemmas of lived ideology' (BiIIig et al., 1988). Billig (1992) analysed ordinary people's discourses about British monarchism. He points out that people employ dilemmatic themes as they justifY, mitigate and make sense of their own non-privileged positions under egalitarianism. I use Billig's work as a main reference, and apply his analytical frameworks (discursive psychology) for my investigation ofJapanese monarchism. Amongst several features ofJapanese conversation, I focus on its complicated naming and honorific systems. These systems almost always encode power structures amongst speaker-addressee, speaker-referent as well as addressee-referent relationships. Analysing people's mundane (family) conversations about the Emperor system, I have found contradictory rhetorical common-places, which are not always voiced explicitly, but are often formulated implicitly through these linguistic implications (i.e. naming, honorifics). Moreover, these codes have to be managed in their particular discursive contexts where the different systems of showing honour can conflict. By analysing news articles, in addition, I focus on a terminology which is employed exclusively to describe an Emperor's death. Lookingat the contexts in which terms are used (and not used), the process of construction ofthe social reality (i.e. monarchism under egalitarian social norm) is illustrated. Through my analysis, I believe, a new perspective for Japanese monarchism is introduced: people represent the institutional reality and accept the inequality simultaneously through mundane discursive interaction.