ScholarGate
助手

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。

Comparative Historical Archival Research×文献分析×
领域田野方法质性研究
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份Late 19th century (archival foundations); mid-20th century (comparative systematic application)1920
提出者Leopold von Ranke (archival history); Theda Skocpol, Barrington Moore (comparative-historical synthesis)Max Weber and Karl Mannheim
类型Qualitative comparative research designMethod
开创性文献Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 978-0521294997Scott, J. (1990). A Matter of Record: Documentary Sources in Social Research. Polity Press. ISBN: 978-0745608419
别名comparative-historical analysis, cross-national archival research, comparative archival history, CHARdocumentary analysis, textual analysis, content analysis of documents, archival research
相关64
摘要Comparative historical archival research combines systematic examination of primary archival sources across two or more historical cases — nations, regions, institutions, or time periods — to identify causal patterns, structural similarities, and divergences that single-case histories cannot reveal. It is the method of choice when researchers want to explain why similar or different outcomes emerged across distinct historical contexts using documentary evidence.Document analysis is a systematic qualitative research method for examining written, visual, or audiovisual sources—such as policy documents, historical records, organizational records, media reports, emails, social media posts, photographs, or videos—to extract meaning, identify patterns, and understand social phenomena. Developed by Weber and Mannheim in early 20th-century sociology, the method bridges historical research, content analysis, and textual interpretation. Document analysis is used across disciplines to understand organizational change, policy evolution, media representation, historical events, and cultural meaning. Documents provide evidence of what organizations, institutions, or societies value, decide, and communicate, often revealing contradictions between policy and practice.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 4 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Comparative Historical Archival Research · Document Analysis. 于 2026-06-18 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare