Abduction and abductively-driven research approaches have been foregrounded by researchers as a way to introduce new concepts, ideas and insights. This paper argues that while abduction allows for the introduction of new concepts, ideas and insights, abduction as articulated by many scholars is welded to representational thought, which stifles the emergence of the new. The key representational assumption in abduction is that abduction tends to be linked to a mental process that resides within an independent humanist subject. This paper posits that this limit of abduction can be disrupted by embracing a non-representational understanding of practices. This non-representational notion of practices will then serve as a transition to a Deleauzean and Guattarian (re)articulation of thought as becoming. In brief, when thought is (re)articulated as a becoming, it disrupts the key representational assumption and points towards enhancing the potential of abductively-driven research in asking new questions and research enactments, which in turn co-constitutes new realities for certain groups.
AnsellC (2016) Pragmatist interpretivism. In: BevirMRhodesRAW (eds) Routledge Handbook of Interpretive Political Science.
New York:
Routledge, pp. 86–98.
4.
BacchiC (2012) Strategic interventions and ontological politics: Research as political practice. In: BletsasABeasleyC (eds) Engaging With Carol Bacchi: Strategic Interventions and Exchanges.
Adelaide:
University of Adelaide Press, pp. 141–156.
5.
BadmingtonN (2003)
Theorizing posthumanism. Cultural Critique53: 10–27.
6.
BellJA (2016) Deleuze and Guattari’s What Is Philosophy.
Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
7.
BlaikieN (2014) Approaches to Social Enquiry.
Cambridge:
Polity Press.
8.
BlaikieN (2018)
Confounding issues related to determining sample size in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology21(5): 635–641.
9.
BrinkmannS (2012) Qualitative inquiry in everyday life: Working with everyday life materials.
Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications Inc.
10.
BrinkmannS (2014)
Doing Without Data. Qualitative Inquiry20(6): 720–725.
11.
Burch R (2018) Charles Sanders Peirce. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Winter 2018 ed. Standford, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/peirce/
12.
CharmazK (2008) Reconstructing grounded theory. In: AlasuutariPBickmanLBrannenJ (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods.
London:
SAGE, pp. 461–479.
13.
Chew AW (2019) Quasi-markets, competition, and school choice lotteries. Educational Policy 33: 587--614.
14.
Chew AW (2020) Informed guessing: enacting abductively-driven research. International Journal of Research & Method in Education 43: 189--200.
15.
ClarkA (1997) Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again.
London:
MIT Press.
ColebrookC (2002b) Understanding Deleuze.
Crows Nest:
Allen & Unwin.
18.
CooleDFrostS (2010) New Materialism: Ontology, Agency, and Politics.
London:
Duke University Press.
19.
DanermarkBEkströmMJakobsenL, et al. (2002) Explaining Society: Critical Realism in the Social Sciences.
London:
Routledge.
20.
de FreitasEDixon-RománE (2017)
The computational turn in education research: Critical and creative perspectives on the digital data deluge. Research in Education98(1): 3–13.
21.
DeleuzeG (1968/1994) Difference and Repetition.
London:
The Athlone Press.
22.
DeleuzeGGuattariF (1987/2005) A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
23.
DeleuzeGGuattariF (1994) What Is Philosophy?
New York:
Columbia University Press.
24.
DewsburyJD (2010) Performative, non-representational, and affect-based research: Seven injunctions. In: DeLyserDHerbertSAitkenS, et al. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Geography.
London:
SAGE, pp. 321–334.
25.
DewsburyJDHarrisonPRoseM, et al. (2002)
Enacting geographies. Geoforum33(4): 437–440.
26.
DorlingD (2014) Inequality and the 1%.
London:
Verso.
27.
Eco U and Sebeok T (1983) The sign of three: Dupin, Holmes & Peirce. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
28.
EisenhardtKM (1989)
Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review14(4): 532–550.
29.
EscobarO (2015)
Scripting deliberative policy-making: Dramaturgic policy analysis and engagement know-how. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice17(3): 269–285.
30.
FannKT (1970) Peirce’s Theory of Abduction.
The Hague:
Martinus Nijhoff.
31.
Fletcher AJ (2017) Applying critical realism in qualitative research: Methodology meets method. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 20: 181--194.
32.
GlynosJHowarthD (2007) Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory.
New York:
Routledge.
33.
HackingI (2007)
Our neo-Cartesian bodies in parts. Critical Inquiry34(1): 78–105.
34.
Hein SF (2016) The new materialism in qualitative inquiry: How compatible are the philosophies of Barad and Deleuze? Cultural Studies -- Critical Methodologies 16: 132--140.
35.
HansonNR (1965) Patterns of Discovery.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
36.
HarawayD (1991) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In: HarawayD (ed.) Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.
London:
Free Association Books, pp. 183–202.
37.
HarawayD (2016) Manifestly Haraway,
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
38.
HawkesworthM (2006) Contending conceptions of science and politics: Methodology and the constitution of the political. In: YanowDSchwartz-SheaP (eds) Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn.
New York:
M.E. Sharpe, Inc., pp. 27–49.
39.
HeimansS (2014)
Education policy enactment research: Disrupting continuities.Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education35(2): 307–316.
40.
HekmanS (2010) The Material of Knowledge: Feminist Disclosure.
Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
41.
HogganC (2016)
A typology of transformation: Reviewing the transformative learning literature. Studies in the Education of Adults48(1): 65–82.
42.
HouserN (1992) Introduction. In: HouserNKloeselC (eds) The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings – Volume 1 (1867-1893).
Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, pp. xix–xli.
43.
IngoldT (2000) The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill.
London:
Routledge.
44.
JonesO (2008)
Stepping from the wreckage: Geography, pragmatism and anti-representational theory. Geoforum39(4): 1600–1612.
45.
KlagMLangleyA (2013)
Approaching the conceptual leap in qualitative research. International Journal of Management Reviews15(2): 149–166.
46.
LatherPSt. PierreEA (2013)
Post-qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education26(6): 629–633.
47.
LawJ (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research.
New York:
Routledge.
48.
LiptonP (2006) Abduction. In: SarkarSPfeiferJ (eds) The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia.
New York:
Routledge, pp. 1–2.
49.
LockeKGolden-Biddle K and FeldmanMS (2008)
Making doubt generative: Rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. Organization Science19(6): 907–918.
50.
MacLureM (2013)
Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education26(6): 658–667.
51.
MassumiB (2010)
What concepts do: Preface to the Chinese translation of A Thousand Plateaus. Deleuze Studies4(1): 1–15.
52.
MazzeiLA (2013)
A voice without organs: Interviewing in posthumanist research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education26(6): 732–740.
53.
NagelJ (2006) Empiricism. In: SarkarSPfeiferJ (eds) The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia.
New York:
Routledge, pp. 235–243.
54.
NovakB (2014) Hitler and Abductive Logic: The Strategy of a Tyrant.
New York:
Lexington Books, p. 250.
55.
O’SullivanEVTaylorMM (2004) Learning Toward an Ecological Consciousness: Selected Transformative Practices.
New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
56.
OrfieldGFrankenbergE (2013) Educational Delusions? Why Choice Can Deepen Inequality and How to Make Schools Fair.
Berkeley:
University of California Press.
57.
PeirceCS (1960a) Collected Papers: Volume 1 and 2.
Cambridge:
The Belknap Press.
58.
PeirceCS (1960b) Collected Papers: Volume 5 and 6.
Cambridge:
The Belknap Press.
59.
PeirceCS (1998) The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings – Volume 2 (1893–1913).
Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
60.
PopperK (1935/2002) The Logic of Scientific Discovery.
London:
Routledge.
61.
ReddingtonSPriceD (2016)
Cyborg and autism: Exploring new social articulations via posthuman connections. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education29(7): 882–892.
62.
ReichenbachH (1938/1961) Experience and Prediction.
Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
63.
ReichertzJ (2007) Abduction: The logic of discovery of grounded theory. In: BryantACharmazK (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory.
London:
SAGE, pp. 214–228.
64.
ReichertzJ (2014) Induction, deduction, abduction. In: FlickU (ed.) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis.
London:
SAGE, pp. 123–135.
65.
RouseJ (1996) Engaging Science: How to Understand Its Practices Philosophically.
New York:
Cornell University Press.
66.
Schwartz-SheaPYanowD (2012) Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and Processes.
New York:
Routledge.
67.
SimonsMOsslenMPetersMA (2009) Re-Reading Educational Policies: A Handbook Studying the Policy Agenda of the 21st Century.
Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers.
68.
SinghPHeimansSGlasswellK (2014)
Policy enactment, context and performativity: Ontological politics and researching Australian National Partnership policies. Journal of Education Policy29(6): 826–844.
69.
St. PierreEA (1997)
Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education10(2): 175–189.
70.
St. PierreEA (2000)
Poststructural feminism in education: An overview. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education13(5): 477–515.
71.
St. PierreEAJacksonAYMazzeiLA (2016)
New empiricisms and new materialisms: Conditions for new inquiry. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies16(2): 99–110.
72.
StagollC (2010a) Arborescence schema. In: ParrA (ed.) The Deleuze Dictionary: Revised Edition.
Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press, pp. 14–15.
73.
StagollC (2010b) Difference. In: ParrA (ed.) The Deleuze Dictionary: Revised Edition.
Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press, pp. 74–76.
74.
StakeRE (2006) Multiple Case Study Analysis.
New York:
The Guilford Press.
75.
ThriftN (1996) Spatial Formations.
London:
SAGE.
76.
ThriftN (2008) Non-Representational Theory: Space, Politics, Affect.
New York:
Routledge.
77.
TormeyS (2006) ‘
Not in my Name’: Deleuze, Zapatismo and the critique of representation. Parliamentary Affairs59(1): 138–154.
78.
WilliamsJ (2003) Gilles Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition: A Critical Introduction and Guide.
Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
79.
YinRK (1984) Case Study Research: Design and Methods.
Thousand Oaks:
SAGE.
80.
ZembylasM (2017)
The contribution of non-representational theories in education: Some affective, ethical and political implications. Studies in Philosophy and Education36(4): 393–407.
81.
ZembylasM (2019) Emotions, affects, and trauma in classrooms: Moving beyond the representational genre. Research in Education 106(1): 59--76.
