Cover not available

In:Digital and Internet-Based Research Methods in Applied Linguistics
Edited by Matt Kessler
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 15] 2026
► pp. 35–57

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 3
Digital discourse approaches

 | East Tennessee State University
Published online: 5 January 2026
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.15.03pau
Abstract
Digital discourse is a routine part of social interaction and can be used as a source of data to answer a variety of research questions. This chapter illustrates a design framework that can be used to generate and evaluate research studies using digital discourse data. Drawing on Paulus and Wise (2019), I deconstruct several studies to illustrate how key research design decisions can be used to assess methodological alignment. These decisions include selecting an object of research interest, identifying the explicit or implied assumptions about the nature and function of digital discourse, defining the technical and social context characteristics of the platforms, creating research questions, selecting a methodological approach, making ethical data bounding and extraction decisions, and choosing data analysis methods. Ethical considerations, challenges and issues, and future directions for the development of digital discourse approaches are also discussed.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Frequently asked research questions
  • 3.Implementation
  • 4.Example studies
    • Lewis and Weston (2019)
    • Windle and Possas (2023)
    • Breazu and Machin (2022)
    • Grusauskaite et al. (2022)
    • McCullough and Lester (2021)
    • Chiang et al. (2024)
  • 5.Ethics and research integrity considerations
  • 6.Challenges and issues
  • 7.Future research directions
  • References
References (36)
References
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyżanowski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse & Society 19(3), 273–306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breazu, P. & Machin, D. (2022). Racism is not just hate speech: Ethnonationalist victimhood in YouTube comments about the Roma during Covid-19. Language in Society, 52, 511–531. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chiang, E., de Rond, M. & Lok, J. (2024). Identity in a self-styled ‘paedophile-hunting’ group: A linguistic analysis of stance in Facebook group chats, Applied Linguistics 45(4), 599–620. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dalmaijer, E., Stommel, W., Pas, B., & Spooren, W. (2024). Ethical challenges in collecting pre-existing digital data for linguistic research. Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finkelstein, S., & Netz, H. (2023). Challenging folk-linguistics: Grammatical and spelling variation in students’ writing in Hebrew on WhatsApp and in essays. Applied Linguistics 44(3), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, J. & Richardson, J. E. (2017). The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies. Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1972). The discourse on language. In J. Medina & D. Wood (Eds.), Truth: Engagements across philosophical traditions (pp. 315–35). Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García, O., Johnson, S. I., Seltzer, K., & Valdés, G. (2017). The translanguaging classroom: leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Caslon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017 [1967]). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gliniecka, M. (2023). The ethics of publicly available data research: A situated ethics framework for Reddit. Social Media + Society, 9(3). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grusauskaite, K., Harambam, J., & Aupers, S. (2022). Picturing opaque power: How conspiracy theorists construct oppositional videos on YouTube. Social Media + Society, 8(2). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding. In Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (Ed.), Culture, media, language: Working papers in cultural studies (pp. 128–138). Reprinted as Encoding and decoding the message, in J. Angermuller, D. Maingueneau, R. Wodak (Eds.), The Discourse Studies Reader: Main currents in theory and analysis (2014). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hennick, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591–608. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Housley, W., & Dahl, P. (2024). Membership categorisation, sociological description and role prompt engineering with ChatGPT. Discourse & Communication, 18(6), 848–858. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaffe, A. (2009). Stance: Sociolinguistic perspectives. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jenkins, H. (2012). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kessler, M., Marino, F., & Liska, D. (2023). Netnographic research ethics in applied linguistics: A systematic review of data collection and reporting practices. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 2(3), 10082. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lewis, P., & Weston, K. M. (2019). Representations of young cancer survivorship: A discourse analysis of online presentations of self. Cancer Nursing, 42(1), 79–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Z., & Wang, L. (2024). Investigating translanguaging strategies and online self-presentation through internet slang on Douyin (Chinese TikTok). Applied Linguistics Review, 15(6), 2823–2855. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCullough, K. M., & Lester, J. N. (2021). Masculinities made visible: A critical discursive psychology study of Instagram photos. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 22(4), 639–648. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murthy, D. (2024). Sociology of Twitter/X: Trends, challenges and future research directions. Annual Review of Sociology 50, 34.1–34.22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paulus, T., & Wise, A. (2019). Looking for insight, transformation and learning in online talk. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paulus, T., Woods, M., Atkins, D., & Macklin, R. (2017). The discourse of qualitative data analysis software (QDAS): Reporting practices of ATLAS.ti and NVivo users with implications for best practices. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 20(1), 35–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paulus, T., & Roberts, K. (2018). Crowdfunding a “real-life superhero”: The construction of worthy bodies in medical campaign narratives. Discourse, Context & Media, 21, 64–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stade, E. C., Stirman, S. W., Ungar, L. H., et al. (2024). Large language models could change the future of behavioral healthcare: A proposal for responsible development and evaluation. npj Mental Health Research, 3, 12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stommel, W., Paulus, T. & Atkins, D. (2017). “Here’s the link”: Hyperlinking in service-focused chat interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 115, 56–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sun, Y., Wang, G., & Feng, H. (2021). Linguistic studies on social media: A bibliometric analysis. Sage Open, 11(3). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods for critical discourse analysis (pp. 62–86). Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, T., & Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Warren, A., & Paulus, T. (2020). Postgraduate students’ use of stories and personal experience to accomplish epistemic positioning in online discussion forums. Classroom Discourse 11, 22–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1993). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Willig, C. (2008). Introducing qualitative research in psychology (2nd ed.) Open University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Windle, J., & Possas, L. A. (2023). Translanguaging and educational inequality in the global South: Stance-taking amongst Brazilian teachers of English. Applied Linguistics, 44(2), 312–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziegler, M., Paulus, T. M., & Woodside, M. (2006). “This course is helping us all arrive at new viewpoints, isn’t it?” Making meaning through dialogue in a blended environment. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(4), 302–319. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue