Startseite Documenting knowledge mobilization: a quantitative analysis of citation and reported speech in a Canadian public inquiry
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Documenting knowledge mobilization: a quantitative analysis of citation and reported speech in a Canadian public inquiry

  • Tosh Tachino

    Tosh Tachino received his PhD in rhetoric and professional communication from Iowa State University. His research interests include rhetorical genre theory, academic writing, and legal genres. He teaches rhetorical grammar, informal logic, and Japanese in Beaumont, Texas, USA. His recent work appeared in Written Communication and Genre and the Performance of Publics (2016, Utah University Press).

    EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 20. Oktober 2017

Abstract

Research into citation and reported speech has identified a number of functions, such as measures of influence, solidarity and distancing, demonstration, and construction of knowledge. This study brings citation analysis to knowledge mobilization – a situation in which research informs public policy. In the present case, it was a Canadian public inquiry on a wrongful murder conviction that prompted many police departments across the country to adopt new procedures that were informed by psychology research to minimize the chances of wrongful conviction. This article focuses on the result of a quantitative analysis that goes beyond simple counting to provide a citation profile of the inquiry report and discusses what such systematic description can reveal. The findings include a particular attribution practice of privileging expert statements but only when they are attributed to the speakers rather than to their writing or to the transcripts of their speech. In addition, the quantitative data revealed no correlation between rhetorical framing and formal citation or direct quotes. These findings lead to discussions on functions of citation and reported speech in this document, as well as the relationship between linguistic form and knowledge mobilization.

About the author

Tosh Tachino

Tosh Tachino received his PhD in rhetoric and professional communication from Iowa State University. His research interests include rhetorical genre theory, academic writing, and legal genres. He teaches rhetorical grammar, informal logic, and Japanese in Beaumont, Texas, USA. His recent work appeared in Written Communication and Genre and the Performance of Publics (2016, Utah University Press).

Appendix: source categories

  1. Academic Texts (A-TXT): academic: books and articles

  2. Speech by Academics (A-SP)

  3. Transcripts of Academics (A-Trans): Testimony by academics, but the writer formally attributed it to the transcript of that testimony

  4. CV (CV): Curriculum Vitae

  5. Law (LAW): Laws and regulations, including the Canadian Charter and legal guidelines

  6. Legal Texts, including court cases (LEG)

  7. Government Publications (GOV)

  8. Popular Media (POP)

  9. Speech (by non-academics), including testimony (SP)

  10. Transcript (TRANS): Testimony by non-academic witnesses when attributed to the transcript

  11. Public Inquiries (INQ)

  12. Technical Texts (TECH), including police reports, doctor’s notes, telephone records

  13. Informal written texts (INF)

  14. Unknown (UNK): Unrecoverable source

References

Afros, Elena & Catherine Schryer. 2009. Promotional (meta)discourse in research articles in language and literary studies. English for Specific Purposes 28. 58–68.10.1016/j.esp.2008.09.001Suche in Google Scholar

Calsamiglia, Helena & Carmen López Ferrero. 2003. Role and position of scientific voices: Reported speech in the media. Discourse Studies 5(2). 147–173.10.1177/1461445603005002308Suche in Google Scholar

Carden, Frederick. 2005. Making the most of research: The influence of IDRC-supported research on policy processes. Paper presented at the International conference African Economic Research Institutions and Policy Development: Opportunities and Challenges. Dakar, Senegal. http://web.idrc.ca/uploads/user-S/(accessed 18 August 2007).Suche in Google Scholar

Clark, Herbert H. & Richard J. Gerrig. 1990. Quotation as demonstrations. Language 66(4). 764–805.10.2307/414729Suche in Google Scholar

Collins, Daniel E. 2006. Speech reporting and the suppression of orality in seventeenth-century Russian trial dossiers. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 7(2). 265–292.10.1075/jhp.7.2.06colSuche in Google Scholar

Connors, Edward, Thomas Lundregan, Neal Miller & McEwen. Tom. 1996. Convicted by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial (NIJ Publication No. NCJ 161258). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Suche in Google Scholar

Court, Julius, Ingie Hovland & John Young. 2005. Bringing research and policy in development: Evidence and the change process. Bradford: ITDG.10.3362/9781780444598Suche in Google Scholar

Crewe, Emma & John Young. September, 2002. Bringing research and policy: Context evidence and links (ODI Working Paper No. 173). http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/working_papers/WP173.pdf (accessed 28 July 2007).Suche in Google Scholar

Doty, Kathleen L. 2007. Telling tales: The role of scribes in constructing the discourse of the Salem witchcraft trials. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 8(1). 25–41.10.1075/jhp.8.1.03dotSuche in Google Scholar

Fahnestock, Jeanne. 1986. Accommodating science: The rhetorical life of scientific facts. Written Communication 15. 330–350.10.1177/0741088398015003006Suche in Google Scholar

Figueroa, Maria Elena, D. Lawrence Kincaid, Manju Rani & Gary Lewis. 2002. Communication for social change: An integrated model for measuring the process and its outcomes. New York: Rockefeller Foundation. http://www.comminit.com/en/node/1273.Suche in Google Scholar

Giltrow, Janet. 2002. Academic Writing, 3rd edn. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Graham, Smith, L. 1982. Mechanisms for public participation at a normative planning level in Canada. Canadian Public Policy 8. 561–572.10.2307/3549306Suche in Google Scholar

Greenbaum, Sidney & Randolph Quirk. 1990. A student’s grammar of the English language. Harlow, England: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar

Grindle, Merilee & John W. Thomas. 1990. After the decision: Implementing policy reforms in developing countries. World Development 18. 1163–1181.10.1016/0305-750X(90)90096-GSuche in Google Scholar

Günthner, Susanne. 1999. Polyphony and the “layering of voices” in reported dialogues: An analysis of the use of prosodic devices in everyday reported speech. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 685–708.10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00093-9Suche in Google Scholar

Haas, Ernst B. 1991. When knowledge is power: Three models of change in international organizations. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520378865Suche in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2000. Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.Suche in Google Scholar

Inquiries Act, R.S.C. 1985. Ch. I–11.Suche in Google Scholar

Kingdon, John. 1984. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little Brown.Suche in Google Scholar

Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Latour, Bruno & Steve Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400820412Suche in Google Scholar

Law, John. 1986. Laboratories and texts. Michel Callon, John Law & Arie Rip (eds.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: Sociology of science in the real world, 35–50. London: Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-349-07408-2_3Suche in Google Scholar

MacDonald, Susan Peck. 1992. A method for analyzing sentence-level differences in disciplinary knowledge making. Written Communication 9. 533–569.10.1177/0741088392009004004Suche in Google Scholar

Matoesian, Gregory M. 1998. Discursive hegemony in the Kennedy Smith rape trial: Evidence of an age graded allusion in expert testimony. Pragmatics 8(1). 3–19.10.1075/prag.8.1.01matSuche in Google Scholar

Matoesian, Gregory M. 1999. The grammaticalization of participant roles in the construction of expert identity. Language in Society 28(4). 491–521.10.1017/S0047404599004017Suche in Google Scholar

Mayes, Patricia. 1990. Quotation in spoken language. Studies in Language 14. 325–363.10.1075/sl.14.2.04maySuche in Google Scholar

Merryman, John Henry. 1977. Toward a theory of citations: An empirical study of the citation practice of the California Supreme Court in 1950, 1960, and 1970. Southern California Law Review 50. 381–428.Suche in Google Scholar

Moed, Henk F. 2005. Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.Suche in Google Scholar

Moravcsik, Michael J. & Poovanalingam Murugesan. 1975. Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social Studies of Science 5(1). 86–92.10.1177/030631277500500106Suche in Google Scholar

National Research Council. 2002. The age of expert testimony: Science in the courtroom: report of a workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Ogden, Patti. 1993. Mastering the lawless science of our law: A story of legal citation indexes. Law Library Journal 85. 1–37.Suche in Google Scholar

Saks, Michael J., Howard Larsen & Carol J. Hodne. 1996. Is there a growing gap among law, law practice, and legal scholarship?: A systematic comparison of law review articles one generation apart. Suffolk University Law Review 30. 353–377.Suche in Google Scholar

Salter, Liora. 1981. Public inquiries in Canada. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Science Council of Canada.Suche in Google Scholar

Schryer, Catherine F., Stephanie Bell, Marcellina Mian, Marlee M. Spafford & Lorelei Lingard. 2011. Professional citation practices in child maltreatment forensic letters. Written Communication 28(2). 147–171.10.1177/0741088311399710Suche in Google Scholar

Small, Henry. 1982. Citation context analysis. Progress in Communication Sciences 3. 287–310.Suche in Google Scholar

Sneijder, Petra. 2014. The embedding of reported speech in a rhetorical structure by prosecutors and defense lawyers in Dutch trials. Text & Talk 34(4). 467–490.10.1515/text-2014-0012Suche in Google Scholar

Stone, Diane. 2001. The policy research knowledge elite and global policy processes. In Daphne Josselin & William Wallace (eds.). Non-state actors in world politics. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave.10.1057/9781403900906_7Suche in Google Scholar

Swales, John. 1986. Citation analysis and discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics 7(1). 39–56.10.1093/applin/7.1.39Suche in Google Scholar

Tachino, Tosh. 2008. Academic research and public policy: Rhetorical lessons from the Sophonow Inquiry. Ames, IA: Iowa State University dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Tachino, Tosh. 2012. Theorizing uptake in knowledge mobilization: A case for intermediary genre. Written Communication 29(4). 455–476.10.1177/0741088312457908Suche in Google Scholar

Tachino, Tosh. 2016. Multiple intertextual threads and (un) likely uptakes: An analysis of a Canadian public inquiry. Mary Jo Reiff & Anis Bawarshi (eds.), Genre and the performance of publics, 178–198. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.10.7330/9781607324430.c009Suche in Google Scholar

Varpio, Lara, Catherine F. Schryer, Pascale Lehoux & Lorelei Lingard. 2006. Working off the record: Physicians’ and nurses’ transformations of electronic patient record-based patient information. Academic Medicine 81(10). S35–S39.10.1097/01.ACM.0000237699.49711.35Suche in Google Scholar

Walker, Alice G. 1990. Language at work in the law. In Judith Levi & Anne Graffam Walker (eds.), Language in the judicial process. New York and London: Plenum Press.10.1007/978-1-4899-3719-3Suche in Google Scholar

Waugh, Linda R. 1995. Reported speech in journalistic discourse: The relation of function and text. Text 15(1). 129–173.10.1515/text.1.1995.15.1.129Suche in Google Scholar

White, Howard D. 2004. Citation analysis and discourse analysis revisited. Applied Linguistics 25(1). 89–116.10.1093/applin/25.1.89Suche in Google Scholar

Zhang, L. 2011. Arguing with otherness: Intertextual construction of the attorney stance in the Chinese courtroom. Text & Talk-An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies 31(6). 753–769.10.1515/text.2011.036Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-10-20
Published in Print: 2017-11-27

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 23.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/text-2017-0025/html?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen