Methoden vergleichen

	Kritische Dokumentenanalyse – Dokumente durch eine kritische Linse betrachten	Interpretative Dokumentenanalyse
Fachgebiet	Qualitativ	Qualitativ
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Entstehungsjahr	Late 20th – early 21st century (2000s–present as an explicit variant)	2000s (building on hermeneutic traditions from the 20th century)
Urheber	Glenn Bowen; Lindsay Prior (foundational document analysis); critical theory tradition (Freire, Habermas)	Glenn Bowen (systematic method); Lindsay Prior (social use of documents)
Typ	Qualitative research design and analytic method	Qualitative document-based research method
Wegweisende Quelle	Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40.	Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40.
Aliasnamen	CDA-doc, critical documentary analysis, critical policy document analysis, critical textual document analysis	interpretive documentary analysis, hermeneutic document analysis, qualitative document analysis, interpretive textual analysis
Verwandt	5	6
Zusammenfassung	Critical document analysis is a qualitative method that systematically examines written, visual, or digital documents — such as policy texts, institutional reports, curriculum materials, and official records — through a critical theoretical lens. Rather than treating documents as neutral containers of information, it interrogates how documents produce, reflect, and reproduce power relations, ideologies, and social inequalities. The approach draws on critical theory traditions, including the work of Paulo Freire and Jurgen Habermas, as well as established frameworks for document analysis developed by Bowen and Prior.	Interpretive document analysis is a qualitative method that systematically examines written, visual, or digital documents to construct meaning from them within their social, historical, and institutional contexts. Rather than simply counting content categories, it reads documents as social artefacts — asking not only what a document says, but what it does, who produced it, for what purpose, and what assumptions it encodes. The approach draws on hermeneutic and interpretive traditions to move between individual passages and the broader context in which they were created.