השוואת שיטות
סקרו את השיטות שבחרתם זו לצד זו; שורות שבהן יש הבדל מודגשות.
| ניתוח מסמכים דיגיטליים× | ניתוח שיח× | |
|---|---|---|
| תחום≠ | איכותני | מחקר איכותני |
| משפחה | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| שנת המקור≠ | 2000s onward (grounded in earlier document analysis traditions) | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| הוגה השיטה≠ | Adapted from traditional document analysis; digital variant developed by qualitative researchers across disciplines (e.g., Bowen 2009; Prior 2003) | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| סוג≠ | Qualitative data analysis method | Method |
| מקור מכונן≠ | Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. DOI ↗ | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| כינויים≠ | online document analysis, digital text analysis, e-document analysis, digital archival analysis | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| קשורות≠ | 6 | 2 |
| תקציר≠ | Digital document analysis is a qualitative method for systematically locating, appraising, and interpreting documents that exist in digital or online form — including websites, emails, institutional reports, policy files, social media content, and digital archives. It applies the established logic of document analysis to born-digital and digitised sources, enabling researchers to examine meaning, discourse, and institutional practice embedded in contemporary digital texts without recruiting participants. | Discourse analysis is a qualitative research methodology that examines how language, communication, and power shape meaning, identity, and social reality. Developed across linguistics, sociology, and psychology (particularly by Norman Fairclough and Jonathan Potter), discourse analysis goes beyond content to analyze language use as a social practice that constitutes and reflects power relations, ideologies, and social structures. |
| ScholarGateמערך נתונים ↗ |
|
|