เปรียบเทียบวิธี

	การวิเคราะห์เนื้อหาทางกฎหมาย	การวิจัยกฎหมายตามหลักคำสอน
สาขาวิชา	วิธีการภาคสนาม	วิธีการภาคสนาม
ตระกูล	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
ปีกำเนิด	1940s–1970s (applied systematically to legal texts)	19th century (systematised ~1860s–1880s in common law jurisdictions)
ผู้ริเริ่ม	Interdisciplinary; foundational content analysis by Harold Lasswell (1940s); applied to legal texts by empirical legal scholars from the 1970s onward	Common law tradition; systematised by jurists such as A.V. Dicey and John Austin
ประเภท	Systematic qualitative-quantitative text analysis	Legal-analytical research method
แหล่งต้นตำรับ	Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. ISBN: 978-0761915454	Hutchinson, T. (2013). Researching and Writing in Law (3rd ed.). Thomson Reuters. ISBN: 9780455229829
ชื่อเรียกอื่น	LCA, legal text analysis, jurimetric content analysis, statutory content analysis	black-letter law research, legal doctrine analysis, analytical jurisprudence, traditional legal scholarship
ที่เกี่ยวข้อง	6	6
สรุป	Legal content analysis applies the systematic procedures of content analysis to legal texts — statutes, regulations, judicial opinions, treaties, and legal commentaries — in order to identify patterns, themes, and trends across a corpus of legal material. It bridges qualitative legal scholarship and quantitative social-science methods, enabling researchers to draw reproducible, evidence-based conclusions about how law is written, applied, or has changed over time.	Doctrinal legal research is the foundational methodology of legal scholarship. It systematically identifies, reads, and analyses authoritative legal sources — statutes, case law, constitutional texts, and regulations — to describe, explain, and critique the content and internal logic of legal doctrine. By working within the accepted hierarchy of legal sources, it answers the question 'What is the law?' with analytical rigour and interpretive precision, producing descriptions of settled doctrine and arguments for how ambiguities should be resolved.