This workshop introduces participants to multimodal analysis in qualitative psychology, focusing on how meaning and social worlds are constructed through multiple modes of communication. In today’s media-saturated environment, psychological phenomena are increasingly expressed, negotiated, and experienced through verbal, visual, sonic, and digital forms. Understanding these intertwined modes is essential for studying how individuals and groups make sense of themselves and their worlds.

Through short lectures and hands-on exercises, participants will gain practical experience in working with multimodal data, reflect on methodological and ethical challenges, and discuss how multimodal analysis can enrich qualitative psychological research. The workshop will also address key considerations in the research process—from data selection and transcription to interpretation and presentation—and provide examples of topics, research questions, and materials suited for this type of inquiry.

Together, we will explore how different media contribute to meaning-making and world-making by analysing a range of materials, including textbooks, memes, YouTube and TikTok videos, and other social media content. Using a discourse-analytic perspective, we will examine how language, imagery, sound, and digital affordances interact to shape representations, identities, emotions, and collective action.

By the end of the workshop, participants will gain both theoretical insight and practical tools for analysing multimodal materials, enabling them to study contemporary psychological phenomena in innovative, reflexive, and media-conscious ways.

The turn to discourse in social psychology, since its inception, has been encompassing a productive tension: micro- and macro- modalities of analytic orientation have been developed, producing alternative, non-reductionist takes in empirical, discourse analytic, social psychological work. While over the years these two modalities, more often than not, have been developing in parallel but separately, this has not always been the case. This workshop focuses on the eclectic methodological framework synthesised by Margaret Wetherell (e.g. 1998), which suggests a theoretical and empirical merging of micro- and macro- perspectives as most appropriate for a critical discourse analytic social psychology. In the first part of the workshop, using textual examples, key notions within the discursive turn in social psychology (such as action orientation and reflexivity of language in its use) will be introduced and then the contours of critical discursive social psychology, will be outlined by discussing the key notions of (a) discursive action model (Edwards & Potter, 1992); (b) rhetorical / ideological dilemmas (Billig et al., 1988; (c) interpretative repertoires (Potter & Wetherell, 1987); and, (d) positioning (Wetherell, 1998). The second part of the workshop examines specific questions and steps that pave the way for the implementation of CDSP. The workshop participants, working in groups with analytic material provided by the moderator, will be encouraged to formulate and answer analytic questions using the introduced CDSP tools and concepts.
 

The world of “generative AI” (genAI) – which some prefer to refer to as simulated intelligence – has rapidly expanded into the everyday. The last year has seen a flourishing of claims, and counter-claims, regarding the possibility of such technology for both doing, and helping with the doing, of “qualitative” research. Some qualitative scholars are (cautious or not) advocates; some are empathetically critical (I situate myself in this latter group). This workshop is designed to explore ways to reflexively and contextually cut through the (marketing) hype, (false) promises, (understandable) hopes, (legitimate) fears, and (sense of) hopelessness around genAI in the contemporary qualitative research space. Intended to help participants develop a values-based set of arguments for their own (non)engagement with genAI, grounded determining the equation between qualitative values, ethics, and scholarly integrity within the scope of a particular context and project.

 

Writing a manuscript reporting qualitative research is an art. It requires thinking about what to report, how, in what depth, and doing this in a way that the trustworthiness and significance of the research is established. Equally it requires reflexive thinking when choosing where to publish that report and why. Where we choose to publish our research (e.g. which journal) affects how we write our research as another set of considerations are introduced such congruity with the scope of a journal, word limits, and compliance with other requirements in that journal´s guidelines. In this workshop we explore how to navigate these decisions and requirements when crafting a paper.

First, we look at examples of how such navigation has been done, and might be done, as well as common reasons for why papers are deemed suitable/not suitable for publication. We explore how to respond to reviews of our manuscript and revise manuscripts during the peer review process. The discussion will also focus on what we need to think about when we are asked to write reviews of other researchers’ journal submissions, book proposals and chapters, and contribute to Advisory and Editorial Boards of journals and/or books. To do this I will draw on my experience as an editor, author, scholar, mentor, student advisor and navigating qualitative research publication related issues in these roles.

Changing register, we will also consider the entanglements of academic publishing with the research marketplace we all find ourselves in where (some types of) publications are a highly sought-after commodity. How do we navigate the position many early and mid-career qualitative researchers find themselves as part of a growing academic precariat forced to market themselves and their research wares (e.g. publications) in tenure competitions?  How can we ensure the legitimacy of qualitative inquiry and inquirers is recognized? How do we make peace with ourselves with some of the decisions that we have to make at times related to publication - survival in the neoliberal academy can be a very sharp two-edged sword at times.

Spoiler Alert: The workshop will be interactive!  Participants will be encouraged to think about what the development of a systematic writing and publication program might look like and require them to think about in next 6-12 months and then beyond.