Dialogic Heteroglossia in Doctoral Psychology Dissertations: A Discourse Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1505.07Keywords:
dialogic heteroglossia, appraisal, engagement, dialogic contraction, dialogic expansionAbstract
This study aims at investigating the use of dialogic heteroglossia in the introductory chapters of doctoral dissertations in psychology. Applying the heteroglossic engagement system (White, 2003; Martin & White, 2005), the current study analyzes a corpus of four doctoral dissertation introductions (2000 words each) from well-recognized British universities. A mixed-methods research design is adopted for analysis. This research design comprises quantitative frequency analysis to identify patterns in the distribution of heteroglossic resources with qualitative discourse analysis to explore their rhetorical functions. The findings demonstrate that dialogic contraction (51.71%) slightly outweighs dialogic expansion (48.29%), in an indication of a preference for consolidating research positions and simultaneously maintaining a space for engagement with alternative perspectives. Among contraction strategies, proclaim-endorse (13.63%) and disclaim-counter (19.31%) are the most predominant. Expansion resources, particularly attribute-acknowledge (27.27%) and entertain (20.67%), echo the emphasis of the discipline on citing prior studies and acknowledging the contestability of knowledge. Remarkably, attribute-distance is entirely absent, indicating a strong commitment to direct source attribution. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how authors of doctoral psychology dissertations construct their research space through heteroglossic engagement. Moreover, they offer insights into the disciplinary writing conventions that sustain academic knowledge authentication.
References
Ash, M. G. (2001). Psychology: Historical and cultural perspectives. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 12399–12405). Elsevier.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. University of Texas Press.
Borg, E. (2003). Discourse community. ELT Journal, 57(4), 398–400. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.4.398
Fryer, D. L. (2013). Exploring the dialogism of academic discourse: Heteroglossic engagement in medical research articles. In G. Andersen & K. Bech (Eds.), English Corpus Linguistics: Variation in Time, Space and Genre (pp. 183–207). Rodopi.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. Continuum.
Lee, S. H. (2006). The use of interpersonal resources in argumentative/persuasive essays by East-Asian ESL and Australian tertiary students (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney).
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Sarup, M. (1993). An introductory guide to post-structuralism and postmodernism. Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Shibata, M. (2018). Exploring the resources of stance and dialogic positioning in Japanese (Doctoral dissertation, The University of New South Wales).
Tardy, C. M. (2012). Current conceptions of voice. In K. Hyland & C. S. Guinda (Eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genres (pp. 34–48). Palgrave Macmillan.
White, P. R. R. (1998). Telling media tales: The news story as rhetoric (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney).
White, P. R. R. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. TEXT - Special Issue on Appraisal, 23(3), 259–284. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011
White, P. R. R. (2012). Exploring the axiological workings of ‘reporter voice’ news stories—Attribution and attitudinal positioning. Discourse, Context & Media, 1, 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2012.10.004
White, P. R. R. (2020). An introductory tour through appraisal theory. Retrieved January 7, 2025, from https://www.grammatics.com/appraisal/appraisaloutline/framed/frame.htm
