This paper discusses the method of Critical Frame Analysis as developed in the MAGEEQ and QUING projects, and looks at various ways CFA has been used within and outside of these projects. While “Critical Frame Analysis” returns 400 hits in Google Scholar, its use has never been analysed until now. The paper is a first attempt at evaluating CFA in the context of multiple methods for discursive analysis, and suggesting ways for improvement.
Questions asked in the paper are twofold. A first set of questions is conceptual/ empirical: what kinds of research questions has the method been linked with? What makes this method useful for analysing discursive dimensions of gender+ equality, what problems are documented? What is the type of questions that fit with the method and what can it not be used for? A second set of questions is methodological/ technical: can CFA only be used in the exact extensive format in which it was developed? Has it been simplified and what are the consequences of this? What methodological problems are linked to the method? Does CFA need the online technology that was used in the QUING project to be used productively?
See also: Dombos, T., Krizsan, A., Verloo, M., & Zentai, V. (2012). Critical Frame Analysis: A Comparative Methodology for the 'Quality in Gender+ Equality Policies' (QUING) project.
http://pdc.ceu.hu/archive/00006845/01/cps-working-paper-critical-frame-analysis-quing-2012.pdf
