方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 比较文件分析× | 比较话语分析× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 质性 | 质性 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | Mid-to-late 20th century; consolidated as explicit qualitative method by 2000s | 1980s–1990s (established as comparative practice through the 1990s) |
| 提出者≠ | 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 |
| 类型≠ | Qualitative comparative research design | Qualitative comparative research approach |
| 开创性文献≠ | 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 |
| 别名 | 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 |
| 相关≠ | 6 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|