So sánh phương pháp
Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.
| Phân tích tài liệu so sánh× | Phân tích diễn ngôn so sánh× | |
|---|---|---|
| Lĩnh vực | Định tính | Định tính |
| Họ | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Năm ra đời≠ | Mid-to-late 20th century; consolidated as explicit qualitative method by 2000s | 1980s–1990s (established as comparative practice through the 1990s) |
| Người khởi xướng≠ | Rooted in historical and social science documentary methods; systematised by scholars such as Lindsay Prior and Glenn Bowen | Norman Fairclough; Ruth Wodak; Teun A. van Dijk |
| Loại≠ | Qualitative comparative research design | Qualitative comparative research approach |
| Công trình gốc≠ | Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. DOI ↗ | Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Longman. ISBN: 978-0582219526 |
| Tên gọi khác | comparative documentary analysis, cross-document analysis, comparative textual analysis, comparative archival analysis | CDA comparative, cross-context discourse analysis, comparative text analysis, multi-site discourse analysis |
| Liên quan≠ | 6 | 5 |
| Tóm tắt≠ | Comparative document analysis is a qualitative research design that systematically examines two or more documents — or document sets — side by side to identify similarities, differences, patterns, and contradictions across contexts, institutions, time periods, or jurisdictions. Drawing on document analysis as a primary method, the comparative dimension adds analytical leverage by allowing the researcher to ask not just what a document says, but how and why it differs from comparable documents elsewhere. | Comparative discourse analysis examines how language constructs meaning, identity, and power by systematically contrasting texts or speech acts drawn from at least two distinct contexts, groups, time periods, or institutions. By holding analytical categories constant across cases, it reveals how discursive patterns diverge or converge, producing insights that single-context discourse analysis cannot generate. |
| ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu ↗ |
|
|