ORIGINAL ARTICLE
TORREÃO, André D Albuquerque [1], DENDASCK, Carla Viana [2]
TORREÃO, André D Albuquerque. DENDASCK, Carla Viana. Advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative research in law. Revista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento. Year 06, Issue 11, Volume 09, pp. 99-111. November 2021. ISSN: 2448-0959, Access link: https://www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/law/qualitative-research, DOI: 10.32749/nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/law/qualitative-research
ABSTRACT
The production of scientific research in the field of law has presented a challenge to professionals who are accustomed to working with other forms of argumentation in their daily practice. Thus, this article emerges as a proposal for reflection through the following guiding question: What are the advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative research in law?
Keywords: Qualitative Research, Production of Scientific Knowledge, Law.
INTRODUCTION
Although common sense identifies legal professionals as excellent producers of written content, since this skill is part of their daily functions, it is necessary to point out that when entering the academic training process, especially in Stricto Sensu programs, where the production of scientific knowledge is systematized, these professionals tend to face inherent challenges due to the differentiation between the argumentative writing used daily and the requirements that constitute the production of academic scientific knowledge.
In this context, it is observed that many master’s and doctoral studies in the field of law have appropriated the qualitative approach for the development of their respective dissertations and theses, especially when the Stricto Sensu Program has a professional approach. Qualitative studies are characterized by promoting the understanding of a phenomenon in its natural environment, where they occur and of which they are part (BECKER, 2014). In this sense, the investigator is the main instrument responsible for capturing information. The process is more important than the product (BOGDAN; BIKLEN, 1994). The information or data collected, in turn, can be obtained and analyzed in various ways, which means that the approach has advantages and disadvantages depending on the objective to be achieved (NEVES, 2015). In qualitative research, the search for data in the investigation leads the researcher down various paths, pointing to certain benefits and constraints at the same time. For this purpose, multiple procedures and instruments are used to constitute the collection and analysis of data (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015).
In this context, this article aims to promote a brief discussion on: What are the advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative research in law?
The instruments that allow for the constitution of data are generally: questionnaires, interviews, observation, focus groups, and document analysis. All have advantages and disadvantages. Concerning documentary research, documents that have not yet undergone any analytical treatment, that is, have not been systematized or analyzed (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015), are used. When this research technique is poorly applied, it renders the method ineffective. The researcher must select, treat, and interpret the information to understand the interaction with its source (BECKER, 2014). When this happens, a wide range of details is added to the research, making the collected data significant. The source to be used will depend on the demands of the object of study and the problem to which an answer is sought (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015).
Thus, this study aims to conduct some reflections on the advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative research in the field of law.
REFLECTIONS ON QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN LAW
Qualitative research presents advantages and disadvantages that should be listed. Among the disadvantages, it is worth mentioning that it often contains biases from the researcher and the interviewee. The challenge is to ensure these do not interfere with the processes of data collection and analysis (BECKER, 2014). The researcher designs the research, questionnaires, and questions in focus groups, and thus, they are the one who administers the questions, leading to a type of response. The researcher, unconsciously, may design questions in such a way that the answers end up supporting their intended conclusion. Additionally, the participants chosen to represent the population must be appropriately selected, as they should adequately represent the general population associated with the context being analyzed (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). The sample should directly reflect the social reality in which it is embedded.
As qualitative research data are subjective, if proper precautions are not taken, the process can be compromised. This happens because the collected responses are often subjective, thus open to various possibilities of interpretation (MACEDO; RONCANCIO; SOUZA, 2018). A researcher may find it difficult to make study participants feel comfortable enough to share their opinions, experiences, and feelings. It is necessary for the responses to be genuine and reflect the context they live in (NEVES, 2015). Interviewees may respond in a way they think will please the researcher or adhere to socially acceptable standards, which can also compromise the effectiveness of the research (AKERS, 2017). Therefore, some precautions are fundamental when collecting and interpreting qualitative research data.
The researcher may interpret data in ways that fit their intended conclusion, which is an error. Additionally, it can be challenging to analyze and interpret the data accurately, as they are subjective and open to many possibilities of analysis (AKERS, 2017). It is also relevant to highlight that, although quantitative research methods collect data based on a specific set of parameters, producing exact numerical results, these data do not reveal the causes that led the subjects to participate in the study and produce certain meanings about the research problem being investigated (BECKER, 2014). Thus, there is often a notion of what is happening but not why it is happening, which is not the case in qualitative research, as it presents the reasons that led to the production of these meaningful units.
Only qualitative methods are capable of capturing the internal and external aspects that led a given subject to adopt a certain point of view (GODOY, 1995). Another disadvantage of quantitative research, which consequently makes qualitative research advantageous, especially for certain types of studies, is the fact that quantitative research can only analyze already known problems (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Quantitative research requires the researcher to formulate a prior hypothesis to conduct certain tests. Thus, the results of these tests may bring new problems or insignificant results, as they do not fit the parameters of the hypothesis (AKERS, 2017). It is noteworthy that the problems known before the test can be neglected, which does not happen in qualitative research. These hypotheses are based on assumptions about the conditions to be tested, which can lead to erroneous interpretations.
For the qualitative approach to be advantageous, it is up to the researcher to find, select, and analyze the sources that will serve as the basis for their studies (MACEDO; RONCANCIO; SOUZA, 2018). In this way, in qualitative research, a series of procedures and tools can be used that allow the collection and analysis of data. Thus, it is worth highlighting what documentary research is, what characterizes it, what a document is, whether documentary research and analysis are the same thing, how documentary analysis should be done, and why the approach is linked to both advantages and disadvantages (when improperly executed) (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Qualitative research, through its typologies, allows the production of new knowledge and creates new ways to understand phenomena (SÁ-SILVA; ALMEIDA; GUINDANI, 2009).
Qualitative research can also be used in the educational field, provided that the researcher “immerses” themselves in the study field to capture the phenomenon from the perspectives contained in the sources, contributing to the area in which it is inserted, whether in education, health, exact and biological sciences, or human sciences (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Documentary research, therefore, consists of an intense and extensive examination of various materials that have not yet undergone any analysis (but can also be reexamined). Thus, other interpretations or complementary information are sought. This information is extracted from the documents themselves (MACEDO; RONCANCIO; SOUZA, 2018). It is stated that documentary research corresponds to that in which the data obtained come from documents.
The objective is to extract information contained in these sources, aiming to understand a given phenomenon (NEVES, 2015). The method used to analyze the documents is called the “document analysis method.” Documentary research, therefore, is a procedure that appropriates methods and techniques that allow the apprehension, understanding, and analysis of documents of various types (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). It is also highlighted that it is characterized as documentary research only when this is the only qualitative approach used as an autonomous method. However, it is also possible to use documents and document analysis as complementary strategies to other methods, making qualitative research advantageous for the researcher (FLICK, 2009). Therefore, qualitative research appropriates certain documents, but it is necessary to consider this source.
It must be clear to the researcher what constitutes a document for the qualitative approach to overcome its disadvantages. Starting from the etymology of the word, a document corresponds to the Latin word ‘documentum.’ This indicates that which teaches and serves as an example (RONDINELLI, 2011). However, conceptualizing and defining a document is a challenge. The term assumes the sense of proof: it is a written instrument that, by law, gives credence to what it attests; it serves as a record, proof, or evidence of facts or events (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). A document is everything that gathers traces of the past, everything that serves as a witness.
These documents can be written, but there are also those of iconographic and cinematographic nature, or any type of recorded testimony, everyday objects, folkloric elements (CELLARD, 2008). Written material documents are considered those that can be used as a source of information. Examples include laws, regulations, norms, opinions, letters, memorandums, personal diaries, autobiographies, newspapers, magazines, speeches, radio and television program scripts, as well as books, statistics, and school records (LÜDKE; ANDRÉ, 1986; OLIVEIRA, 2007). Furthermore, it is emphasized that in a qualitative study, the researcher should understand the documents as ‘means of communication,’ and thus, they were created with a purpose and for some objective, intended for someone to access them (FLICK, 2009).
In this context, it is indicated that it is important to understand who produced the source, its purpose, for whom it was created, the intentionality of its creation, and they should not be used as ‘containers of information’ (BECKER, 2014). It is a form of contextualizing information, and thus, they act as ‘communicative devices.’ These are developed in the production of versions about events (FLICK, 2009). Documentary research is different from bibliographic research. Both use documents, but what differentiates them is the source of the documents. In the first case, there are primary sources that have not received any analytical treatment. In the second case, the sources are secondary and cover all the bibliography already made public regarding the theme (MARCONI; LAKATOS, 2007).
Unlike documentary research, bibliographic research corresponds to a type of research and analysis of documents belonging to the scientific domain, with its main purpose being direct contact with documents related to the study topic (OLIVEIRA, 2007). It is necessary to ensure that the researched sources are already recognized and of public domain (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Data collection from various sources is essential in any research, whether of a documentary nature or not. It corresponds to the phase of collecting preliminary information about the field of interest (MARCONI; LAKATOS, 2007). This would be the first step of research, both in documentary and bibliographic research. Regarding the distinction made to documents, there are two types: those solicited for the research and those unsolicited (FLICK, 2009).
The requested documents are those in which the request is made to people who, for example, write diaries, and, in order to be analyzed, permission is granted for a certain period. An example of an unsolicited document would be the analysis of diaries written by people (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Documentary research conceived as a non-intrusive method makes a distinction between records: the consecutive ones, represented by the production and documentation of administrative processes, and the private episodic ones, produced occasionally (FLICK, 2009). In the selection of documents, the researcher must take certain precautions so that the qualitative approach is as advantageous as possible for this type of study. The focus cannot only be on the content, and thus, a series of variables must be considered (NEVES, 2015).
The context, use, and function of documents are means that allow the understanding and deciphering of a specific case of a life story or a process (BECKER, 2014). The choice of documents, therefore, requires the delimitation of the universe to be investigated before anything else. The document to be chosen, therefore, will depend on the problem to which an answer is sought. The choice cannot be made randomly (FLICK, 2009). The choice is made based on the objectives and/or hypotheses related to the theoretical support. Given this scenario, it is worth noting that the questions formulated by the researcher and that will be applied to the document are as important as the document itself, which implies checking for meaning (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). To make the selection appropriate, four criteria must be followed.
They are represented by authenticity (questioning if it is genuine and unquestionably of origin/whether it is primary or secondary); credibility or accuracy (if there are errors and distortions present); representativeness (if it is typical of its type and, if not, the extent of this atypicality must be clear); and significance (if the document is clear and understandable) (FLICK, 2009). The possibilities offered by qualitative research have advantages and disadvantages (as do other methods). Among the advantages, it can be mentioned that the sources constitute a stable and rich source from which the researcher can extract any evidence capable of substantiating their claims (GUBA; LINCOLN, 1981). Furthermore, these sources can be consulted several times and have low financial cost (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015).
Such characteristics allow the researcher greater accessibility, as well as a way to ratify, validate, or complement the information obtained by other data collection techniques (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Another additional advantage of documents analyzed from the perspective of qualitative research is that they constitute a non-reactive source, which allows the collection of information after long periods of time or when interaction with people becomes capable of altering their behavior, compromising the data (GUBA; LINCOLN, 1981). Documents, therefore, are considered as a natural source of contextualized information. They emerge in a specific context and provide information about it. The use of documentary research also becomes advantageous when one wishes to investigate a phenomenon that has already occurred but still persists and affects social life.
The phenomenon, therefore, is inserted in a timeline, so that behaviors typical of a given moment are considered in that analysis (MACEDO; RONCANCIO; SOUZA, 2018). It is also appropriate that the use of documentary research be encouraged if the researcher’s interest is to study the problem from the expression or language of the subjects involved, and thus, various written productions are admitted as sources, such as academic works (articles, dissertations, theses, reports, and the like), diaries, letters, among other formats (GOMES, 2001). Another advantage associated with document analysis is the use of non-intrusive research methods, so that data collected for practical purposes in the field must be considered (FLICK, 2009).
Given this scenario, it is worth noting that documents can be instructive for understanding social realities in institutional contexts (FLICK, 2009). In this sense, attention is drawn to the fact that in documentary research, data is obtained indirectly, that is, from books, newspapers, official papers, statistical records, photos, disks, films, videos, among other sources (NEVES, 2015). These documentary sources avoid wasting time and embarrassment, thus making it possible to obtain the quantity and quality of data, which makes the research feasible (GIL, 2010). It is also pertinent to note that some social research would only be possible through the analysis of documents, which makes documentary research especially advantageous, enabling the analysis of past knowledge that is still relevant (GIL, 2010).
It also enables the investigation of processes that have motivated social and cultural changes in various fields of knowledge, thus allowing the obtaining of data at a lower cost, while also favoring the obtaining of data without directly or indirectly constraining the subjects (GIL, 2010). It is a process that implies careful observation of the aspects that motivate such social and cultural changes. Even though it is a widely used approach, there are criticisms, disadvantages, and limitations regarding the conduct of research dealing with documents (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Among them, it is worth mentioning that documents are non-representative samples of the studied phenomena, so that documents often do not express reality, as they are not intended to provide data for certain purposes (GUBA; LINCOLN, 1981).
They were not created to provide data for further investigation, and the documents used do not allow for any inferences to be made (GUBA; LINCOLN, 1981). Another listed disadvantage is related to the lack of objectivity and the presence of questionable validity, since documents are results of human and social production, so there are no guarantees that they are reliable (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Another criticism highlights the fact that documents represent arbitrary choices regarding the aspects and themes to be explored (GUBA; LINCOLN, 1981). Another point that makes the approach questionable is the lack of a “standard format” for the creation, handling, and analysis of documents, as well as the complexity of coding the information are also inherent difficulties in this type of research (GODOY, 1995).
Furthermore, there are other difficulties that should be mentioned, such as the fact that, in this type of research, when the researcher begins to deal with issues such as resource limitation, the situation forces them to operate more selectively, so that instead of using all available and/or necessary documents, they limit this use (or possibilities of use) (FLICK, 2009). Another difficulty that should be mentioned is the possible existence of problems that hinder the understanding of the contents of the documents themselves, such as those documents in which reading becomes difficult because they were handwritten, or may have been damaged for some reason (due to climatic conditions, for example) (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015). Therefore, the researcher needs to deal with such variables.
Another limiting factor of this type of research is that it is also necessary to verify who produced the document, and furthermore, one must analyze what was the purpose that motivated this creation. These factors are of vital importance so that the information provided by the researcher is more credible, that is, the presence or absence of possible omissions, errors, and/or distortions is analyzed (KRIPKA; SCHELLER; BONOTTO, 2015).
FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
Qualitative research dealing with documents enables the understanding of specific cases, situations, and subjects through records or documents, either by using them as an autonomous method or as a complement in research. In the case of scientific production in law, especially in postgraduate Stricto Sensu programs, these techniques provide a contributory alternative that is easily embraced by professionals who will face the challenge of producing scientific knowledge, adopting all necessary precautions.
The understanding, identification, and classification of the documents used, along with care in the process of selection and data collection, should enable reliability in relation to the researched reality and provide the researcher with the basis for their arguments and contributions.
REFERENCES
AKERS, H. As desvantagens da pesquisa qualitativa e quantitativa. 2017. Disponível em: https://www.ehow.com.br/desvantagens-pesquisa-qualitativa-quantitativa-info_272066/. Acesso em: 13 set. 2021.
BECKER, H. S. A epistemologia da pesquisa qualitativa. Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito, v. 1, n. 2, p. 184-199, 2014.
BOGDAN, R.; BIKLEN, S. Investigação qualitativa em educação – uma introdução à teoria e aos métodos. Porto: Porto Editora, 1994.
CELLARD, A. A análise documental. In: POUPART, J. et al. (Orgs.). A pesquisa qualitativa: enfoques epistemológicos e metodológicos. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2008.
FLICK, U. Desenho da pesquisa qualitativa. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2009.
GIL, A. C. Métodos e Técnicas de Pesquisa Social. 6ª ed. 3ª reimp. São Paulo: Atlas, 2010.
GODOY, A. S. Introdução à pesquisa qualitativa e suas possibilidades. Revista de administração de empresas, v. 35, n. 2, p. 57-63, 1995.
GOMES, R. A análise de dados em pesquisa qualitativa. In: MINAYO, M. C. S. Pesquisa Social. Teoria, método e criatividade. 18ª ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2001.
GUBA, E. G.; LINCOLN, Y. S. Effective Evaluation. São Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981.
KRIPKA, R.; SCHELLER, M.; BONOTTO, D. L. Pesquisa Documental: considerações sobre conceitos e características na Pesquisa Qualitativa. CIAIQ2015, v. 2, 2015.
LÜDKE, M.; ANDRÉ, D. A pesquisa em educação: abordagens qualitativas. São Paulo: EPU, 1986.
MACEDO, G. F.; RAMÍREZ, N.; SOUZA, D. A importância do método: pesquisa qualitativa em contexto de sala de aula. Argumentos Pró-Educação, v. 3, n. 7, p. 29-50, 2018.
MARCONI, M. A.; LAKATOS, E. M. Fundamentos da Metodologia Científica. 6ª ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2007.
NEVES, M. O. A importância da investigação qualitativa no processo de formação continuada de professores: subsídios ao exercício da docência. Revista Fundamentos, v. 2, n. 1, 2015.
OLIVEIRA, N. M. de.; STRASSBURG, U.; PIFFER, M. Técnicas de pesquisa qualitativa: uma abordagem conceitual. Ciências sociais aplicadas em revista, v. 17, n. 32, p. 87-110, 2017.
RONDINELLI, R. C. O conceito de documento arquivístico frente à realidade digial: uma revisitação necessária. 2011. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência da Informação) – Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, 2011.
SÁ-SILVA, J. R.; ALMEIDA, C. D. de.; GUINDANI, J. F. Pesquisa documental: pistas teóricas e metodológicas. Revista brasileira de história & ciências sociais, v. 1, n. 1, p. 1-15, 2009.
[1] Graduated in Law from Unipê College. Specialization in Constitutional and Administrative Law from Uniamérica.
[2] Ph.D. in Communication and Semiotics from the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo (PUC/SP). Ph.D. in Psychology and Clinical Psychoanalysis. Master’s degree in Religious Sciences from the Mackenzie Presbyterian University. Master’s degree in Clinical Psychoanalysis. Bachelor’s degree in Biological Sciences. Bachelor’s degree in Theology. Has been working for over 15 years with Scientific Methodology (Research Method) in the Guidance of Scientific Production of Master’s and Ph.D. students. Specialist in Market Research and Research in the Health field. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2952-4337. Lattes: https://lattes.cnpq.br/2008995647080248.
Submitted: November, 2021.
Approved: November, 2021.
