手法を比較

	クリティカル・ドキュメント分析	批判的コンテンツ分析
分野	質的手法	質的手法
系統	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
提唱年	Late 20th – early 21st century (2000s–present as an explicit variant)	1980s–2000s (consolidated in practice by the 1990s–2000s)
提唱者	Glenn Bowen; Lindsay Prior (foundational document analysis); critical theory tradition (Freire, Habermas)	Building on Krippendorff (1980) and Altheide (1996); synthesised through critical theory traditions (Frankfurt School, feminist and race critical scholars)
種類	Qualitative research design and analytic method	Qualitative analytical approach
原典	Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40.	Altheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative Media Analysis. Sage. ISBN: 978-0803970892
別名	CDA-doc, critical documentary analysis, critical policy document analysis, critical textual document analysis	CCA, critical textual analysis, ideological content analysis, critical qualitative content analysis
関連	5	5
概要	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.	Critical content analysis is a qualitative approach that examines texts, media, and documents not merely for manifest meaning but for how they construct, reinforce, or contest relations of power, ideology, race, gender, and class. Grounded in critical theory traditions, it asks whose interests a text serves, what voices are silenced, and how language and representation naturalise dominant worldviews. It combines systematic analytic rigour with an explicitly emancipatory or transformative research stance.