Bandingkan metode
Tinjau metode pilihan Anda berdampingan; baris yang berbeda akan disorot.
| Analisis Putusan× | Analisis Wacana× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang≠ | Metode Lapangan | Penelitian Kualitatif |
| Keluarga | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Tahun asal≠ | Medieval English common law; academic formalisation 19th–20th century | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| Pencetus≠ | Common law tradition (England); systematised in Anglo-American jurisprudence | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| Tipe≠ | Qualitative legal research method | Method |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Hutchinson, T. (2010). Researching and Writing in Law (3rd ed.). Thomson Reuters. ISBN: 9780455227689 | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| Alias≠ | judicial decision analysis, legal case analysis, jurisprudential analysis, case-based legal research | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| Terkait≠ | 6 | 2 |
| Ringkasan≠ | Case law analysis is a systematic method for examining judicial decisions to identify binding legal rules, evolving doctrines, and interpretive trends. Rooted in the common law tradition of stare decisis, it requires the researcher to locate the ratio decidendi — the binding reasoning — of each decision, distinguish it from obiter dicta, and trace how that reasoning has been applied, distinguished, or overruled across subsequent cases. The method is fundamental to legal scholarship, litigation strategy, and law reform research. | 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. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|