RESEARCH DESIGN SKETCH

4 Comments

  1. Reply
    lf5995a December 11, 2018

    Theodora,

    Your presentation is very interesting. I have always found IPV and the social structures that support and bolster it riveting. My first comment is that I think you should supply more than just two pieces of legislation, if that is what you are planning to examine. It was unclear to me if the 1956 and 2013 laws were starting/ending points, or if they were your main texts that you will be investigating. Secondly, I think it’d be most interesting to compare you texts (national and local) in a contrasting nature. It was unclear to me if you intended on comparing and contrasting them, or perhaps examining how they influence each other. However, I think it’d be interesting to focus on just one (either local or national), or to focus more on the connection between the two because I found it slightly confusing that you were examining both national and local texts. However, your presentation was very well done! You’re clearly very passionate about this topic, and I look forward to hearing more about how it went next year!

    • Reply
      Theodora Mattei December 11, 2018

      To respond to your questions: I will be looking at every piece of legislation concerning IPV from 1956-2013 (those were just examples of my endpoints in so far as laws). I will also be extending the context to present day to better account for the local implementation of those pieces of legislation. I will be looking at how the national and local discourse interact with each other, or the connection between the two as you said. Thanks for your comments and questions!

  2. Reply
    Megan Ross December 11, 2018

    Hi Theodora,

    Overall, your presentation was very thorough and your puzzle is quite intriguing. In your presentation, you state that it is key to understand the everyday use/meaning/understanding of the IPV laws. I’m wondering if it might be beneficial to explore some of the popular discourses that might give you insight into how the citizens understand these laws.

    Another question I have, and you may have already looked into this, is if there are psychological factors that play into violence against women and if those traits are acknowledged at all in your texts.

  3. Reply
    Naila Ricarte December 11, 2018

    Theodora –

    I think discourse groupings are great and easy for the reader to follow. It looks like you are following the official discourses over time, as you said 60 years, how do you propose to compare the starting point of hermeneutics circle (the 1956 “family law”) to modern day legislature on “intimate partner” crime and “femicide”? I totally agree that these issues are still pertinent in modern day, but interpretivist researchers are tasked with finding intertextuality within scholarship, so I would recommend also pinpointing newer laws that were enacted in the last decade or so for you to make a true comparison of how the official discourse has changed (or stayed the same) over time. Regarding your Research Design Sketch, here is my biggest question moving forward:

    1. What is the biggest distinction between the official discourse of law enforcement and that of government leaders? Are they not mutually enforcing?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *