Methoden vergleichen

	Dokumentenanalyse	Vertrauenswürdigkeitskriterien in der qualitativen Forschung
Fachgebiet	Qualitative Forschung	Qualitative Forschung
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Entstehungsjahr	1920	1985
Urheber	Max Weber and Karl Mannheim	Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba
Typ	Method	Framework
Wegweisende Quelle	Scott, J. (1990). A Matter of Record: Documentary Sources in Social Research. Polity Press. ISBN: 978-0745608419	Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications. ISBN: 978-0803924314
Aliasnamen	documentary analysis, textual analysis, content analysis of documents, archival research	trustworthiness criteria, credibility, dependability, confirmability
Verwandt	4	4
Zusammenfassung	Document analysis is a systematic qualitative research method for examining written, visual, or audiovisual sources—such as policy documents, historical records, organizational records, media reports, emails, social media posts, photographs, or videos—to extract meaning, identify patterns, and understand social phenomena. Developed by Weber and Mannheim in early 20th-century sociology, the method bridges historical research, content analysis, and textual interpretation. Document analysis is used across disciplines to understand organizational change, policy evolution, media representation, historical events, and cultural meaning. Documents provide evidence of what organizations, institutions, or societies value, decide, and communicate, often revealing contradictions between policy and practice.	Trustworthiness is a framework for evaluating the quality and rigor of qualitative research, developed by Lincoln and Guba (1985) as an alternative to quantitative criteria (internal validity, external validity, reliability, objectivity). The framework comprises five criteria: credibility (findings are accurate and grounded in data), transferability (findings apply to other contexts), dependability (findings are consistent and defensible), confirmability (findings reflect the data and participants' perspectives, not researcher bias), and authenticity (research reflects diverse viewpoints and promotes understanding). This framework has become standard for assessing qualitative research across disciplines and guides researchers in designing and reporting rigorous qualitative studies.