Cited by 767Legal Studies and PoliciesLegal Education and Practice InnovationsComparative and International Law Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 72 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Defining and Describing What We Do: Doctrinal Legal Research

Open access
Hutchinson, Terry, Duncan, Nigel·2012·Deakin Law Review

Abstract

The practitioner lawyer of the past had little need to reflect on process. The doctrinal research methodology developed intuitively within the common law — a research method at the core of practice. There was no need to justify or classify it within a broader research framework. Modern academic lawyers are facing a different situation. At a time when competition for limited research funds is becoming more intense, and in which interdisciplinary work is highly valued and non-lawyers are involved in the assessment of grant applications, lawyer-applicants who engage in doctrinal research need to be able to explain their methodology more clearly. Doctrinal scholars need to be more open and articulate about their methods. These methods may be different in different contexts. This paper examines the doctrinal method used in legal research and its place in recent research dialogue. Some commentators are of the view that the doctrinal method is simply scholarship rather than a separate research methodology. Richard Posner even suggests that law is ‘not a field with a distinct methodology, but an amalgam of applied logic, rhetoric, economics and familiarity with a specialized vocabulary and a particular body of texts, practices, and institutions ...’.1 Therefore, academic lawyers are beginning to realise that the doctrinal research methodology needs clarification for those outside the legal profession and that a discussion about the standing and place of doctrinal research compared to other methodologies is required.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21153/dlr2012vol17no1art70

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 72 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 24 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 102
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 50
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
118 of 118
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The doctrinal method is the foundation of the common law and the central method of legal research.

    “The doctrinal method lies at the basis of the common law and is the core legal research method.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There are no effective citation metrics for law.

    “Of course, this is because there are no effective metric measures of citation for law.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Competition for limited research funding is intensifying, interdisciplinary work is highly valued, and non-lawyers assess grant applications.

    “At a time when competition for limited research funds is becoming more intense, and in which interdisciplinary work is highly valued and non-lawyers are involved in the assessment of grant applications”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The university research landscape has changed markedly over twenty years, with more emphasis on group, interdisciplinary and empirical research than on the older model of a lone legal researcher.

    “The research landscape in universities has changed significantly in the last twenty years.There is more emphasis on group, interdisciplinary and empirical research rather than there was under the older paradigm, particularly common in law faculties, of an individual legal researcher working alone.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Academic lawyers now work in broader interdisciplinary settings than before, where doctrinal research processes are little known and methodology explanations are expected differently.

    “However, academic lawyers are now participating in broader interdisciplinary environments than they previously did, where there is little knowledge of doctrinal research processes and where there are different expectations in relation to explanations of research methodologies.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The sample of 60 law theses from the ADT database is sufficiently representative of Australian law HDR theses to support conclusions about lawyers' methodology reporting.

    “The examination of the database took place in October 2010 and covered a reading of 60 theses available digitally.62”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The authors' classification of theses as having a doctrinal component or as traditional legal research is reliable even when students did not label them so.

    “A more recent examination of HDR theses submitted to the Australasian Digital Thesis Program website in the five year period 2004-9, reveals that most of the legal theses had a doctrinal component, even though only a few students overtly identified the study they were conducting as being to any extent 'doctrinal'.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The doctrinal method is often implicit and tacit, so many legal scholars consider it unnecessary to verbalise the process.

    “Unfortunately the doctrinal method is often so implicit and so tacit that many working within the legal paradigm consider that it is unnecessary to verbalise the process.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Funding for legal research is tied to quality, and quality depends on methodological clarity.

    “especially if funding is tied to quality, and quality depends on methodological clarity.”
9 of 9

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 7 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [4]4. The annual figures are 2004 (795), 2005 (849), 2006 (870), 2007 (917) and 2008 (982).
  2. [5]5. Ibid. These figures include Masters by Research: 2004 (85), 2005 (94), 2006 (81), 2007 (94) and 2008 (95).
  3. [7]7. Jian Fu, Corporate Disclosure by Listed Companies in the People's Republic of China and Australia: Seeking an Appropriate Pathway for the Regulation of the Chinese Securities Market (PhD Thesis, University of New South Wales, 2005), iii <http://www. unsworks.unsw.edu.au/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=UNSWORKS&docId= unsworks_894>.
  4. [9]9. H E B Tijssen's thesis noted that 'of the 90 dissertations he investigated … more than 50 per cent had a clearly formulated research question' to explain and justify choices in the work: Jan B M Vranken, 'Methodology of Legal Doctrinal Research: A Comment on Westerman' in Van Hoecke, above n 77, 118, citing H E B Tijssen, De juridische dissertatie onder de loep. De verantwoording van methodologische keuzes in juridische dissertaties (Legal Dissertations through a Magnifying Glass. Justification of Methodological Choices in Legal Dissertations) (Boom Juridische Uitgevers, 2009). 103 Maggie Walter (ed), Social Research Methods (Oxford University Press, 2 nd ed, 2010) 485. 104 Ibid. 105 Hutchinson, Researching and Writing in Law, above n 66, 37. 106 Ibid 38. 107 Van Hoecke, above n 77, 4-11. 108

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 530

Metadata

Authors
Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N.
Affiliations
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
  • City, University of London (GB)
Venue
Deakin Law Review
Published
2012-10-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
83
ISSN
  • 1321-3660 (ISSN-L)
  • 1835-9264
OpenAlex
W1865021432
Cited by
767
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 283 · 2025: 102 · 2024: 81 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 1
FWCI
87.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Deakin Law Review (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (submittedVersion)
  • The Deakin Law Review (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Department for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland
  • Scottish Funding Council
  • Higher Education Funding Council for Wales
  • Times Higher Education
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal Studies and Policies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal Education and Practice Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Law › Comparative and International Law Studies
Keywords
legal research methodology, research funding, interdisciplinary research, Richard Posner

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-01, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-01 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review