Citation: Blackhurst and Edge, 'Book Review, C. Chatterjee, Methods of Research in Law: A Handbook for Students, [1998] 1 Web JCLI <http:///webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/1998/issue1/blackhurst1.html>
C. Chatterjee, Methods of Research in Law: A Handbook for Students, Horsmonden: Old Bailey Press, 1997, 76 pp. including index and bibliography, ISBN 1‑85836‑070‑6, pb £9.95. 

Reviewed by Andrea Blackhurst, LL.B.(Hons.)
Postgraduate Research Assistant

<a.blackhurst@uclan.ac.uk>

 and 

Peter W. Edge, LL.B., Ph.D. (Cantab.)
Senior Lecturer

<p.w.edge@uclan.ac.uk>

both of the University of Central Lancashire.

Copyright  1998 Andrea Blackhurst and Peter Edge.
First Published in Web Journal of Current Legal Issues in association with Blackstone Press Ltd.

This text, by an experienced supervisor and prolific contributor to journals, aims to "explain the basic methods of doing research in law [although] no work on research methodology can be exhaustive" (p 1). The intended readership are undergraduates, especially those undertaking a dissertation, and those planning an LL.M. or Ph.D. degree with an element of legal research. We welcomed the appearance of this text as addressing an important need of which we had become aware ‑ one of us as a recent Ph.D. survivor, supervisor, and research skills teacher on LL.M. degrees; the other as a full-time Ph.D. student about to enter the second year of their project. In this review we discuss the merits of this text, and consider more broadly what a text introducing students to postgraduate research in law should address. 

The text is structured as a series of very short chapters, dealing with ethics, terminology, research tools, research planning and design, sources of information ranging from interviewing to case-analysis, and presentation of the final dissertation or thesis. An introductory text might benefit from dealing with the immediate concerns of likely readers by discussing research planning and design before ethics, tools, and terminology. Within chapters the narrative flow is irregular, and the problems this poses for understanding are exacerbated by the prose style, which seems unsuitable in an introduction for students, some of whom may be worried about embarking on a substantial research project. A good example is the initial discussion of surveys :

"Tools of research help carry out surveys. The purpose of a fundamental research is much higher than that of a survey. A researcher should therefore ensure that the limitations of a survey are clearly stated in his research and that no fundamental conclusions are reached on the basis of survey research as such research being based on probabilities. The legal research for which such summary research may be used may not admit of sufficient degree of reliability. Results of survey research may be employed only with a view to seeking information, primarily of a secondary nature, in pursuing legal research. Survey research on the other hand, may serve some special purpose when carrying out legal research in, for example, consumer protection or issues relating to housing or health etc." (p 15).

A further shortcoming is the insufficient use of cogent examples and advice on how practically to apply the methodologies explained and avoid the highlighted problems. Research methodologies and ethical problems do not exist in a vacuum and, considering the stated target audience of this text, examples would have greatly increased the accessibility and potential practical application of the text. When given, they are usually overly long and of limited relevance. 

As stated above, the author has identified his audience as first-time researchers, either at undergraduate or postgraduate levels, but he fails properly to differentiate between the various needs of his target groups. For example, although he stresses the need for originality throughout the text, at no point does he define the concept or explain the differing demands of the various degrees. This is an important distinction for students as achieving this almost mythical state is often a grave source of worry. Similarly, there should be advice on the appropriateness of the various methodologies. It seems reasonable to expect a handbook in this area to enable students to make a rational, practical choice of methodologies, given the time and resources available. 

The text makes relatively little use of academic references, and does not take the opportunity to guide the reader on to the extensive further reading. A summative bibliography does show a range of materials, but many of these are rather elderly. Of the materials listed, 3 date from before 1950, 13 are from the '50s, 15 from the '60s, 20 from the '70s, 12 from the '80s, and nothing is listed from this decade. Even seminal texts are open to later criticism, development and expansion. We are unsure that relative novices should be directed to such old material and required to distinguish between what is valuable and what has been discredited or refined. The absence of material from this decade is also telling. The readership of the text might well benefit from May (1995) on social research, Holborn (1993) on doctrinal legal research, the fine Real World Research (Robson 1993), and of course Phillips' How to get a Ph.D. ( Phillips 1994). 

The text begins with a discussion of ethics and ethical research. Ethical issues are not always fully recognised by LL.M. students, and so it is valuable to give the issues such a priority. The actual discussion, however, is too superficial and abstract. In particular, criticisms of traditional views of "objectivity" are not touched upon, and the different duties of a researcher are oversimplified to a final commitment to the ultimate reader. Important ethical situations are listed, but there is no attempt made to tie them into the concerns of the particular readership through examples. For instance, many part-time LL.M. students undertake study in an area related to their work, and as part of their career development. This often opens up opportunities for their research, but carries with it substantial ethical implications upon which students need guidance. Finally, although there is some, largely unexplained, discussion of the U.S. Code of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, there is little consideration of the procedures by which U.K. Universities monitor the conduct of their researchers. 

Chapter Two deals with defining terms and concepts such as research, hypothesis and analysis. A glossary would perhaps have been more appropriate, and less intrusive, in order to explain these and other key concepts, such as primary and secondary sources, originality etc. It would also have been useful to extend definitions to include academic views on the meaning of these terms, especially in a legal context. The author also takes this early opportunity to explain different types of questions. Again, this would seem to be more appropriately placed elsewhere, within the chapter on interviews, surveys and questionnaires. He gives useful warnings about the use of emotionally loaded and embarrassing questions and draws the distinction between open-ended and closed questions but appears to indicate that open-ended questions are never useful. No mention is made of the distinctions between quantitative and qualitative research and the appropriateness of different types of questions depending on different purposes.

Chapter Three describes the tools of research which are defined as "the means that may be employed by a researcher in order to collect data" (p 13) and are stated to include published works, interviews, questionnaires, case studies, experience studies and computers. It is problematic and misleading that no mention is made of traditional paper-based "tools", such as Current Law, at this point. Chatterjee does claim that "primary sources of information do not entail application of any tools, as they are already identifiable" but he then implicitly rejects this assertion by describing the use of a "tool" such as LEXIS in order to find case law. There is little discussion of these tools in detail, except for a very brief discussion of use of the use of computers, which is restricted entirely to LEXIS. It would perhaps have been more useful in this section to discuss the various electronic sources available, including on-line databases and CD-ROM’s, and the strengths and weaknesses of these sources compared with paper versions. The text could also have included methods of conducting searches using Boolean operators in order to help avoid common mistakes. Chatterjee does mention the use of the Internet for legal research but is over-optimistic as to the potential of the medium, stating that it is a source "for all published and unpublished work on a topic" (p 15). Again, some indication of the potential and limitations of the use of this source would have been helpful as the expectations of this source are frequently unfulfilled, and the Internet can be positively dangerous to the naive researcher. 

The fourth chapter discusses planning and designing research and gives a useful outline of the processes involved in choosing a topic. The text would have benefited from a more directed approach towards the varied readership and a greater awareness of their different needs and problems. For example, undergraduate students should be warned against tendencies to choose topics which cover well-trodden ground, are too broad, or react to insignificant recent developments. LL.M students need to be made aware of the often very strict limitations on the time available for their project and the corresponding limitations this places on their methods of research. The two paragraphs on formal research design are particularly weak and would have greatly benefited from examples of successful and unsuccessful research designs at the different levels. A consideration of what funding bodies and admissions tutors look for in a research design would also have been helpful for the potential research student. Chatterjee rightly emphasises the importance of exploration of problems prior to research design but could have devoted more time to the uses and practical preparation of a literature review and, for research students, the challenges of making a legal research proposal conform to models developed by the social sciences and humanities. 

Chapter Five deals with literary sources of information, and is open to strong criticism. The chapter aims to deal with primary sources, but is hampered from the start by a definition of primary materials which seems both over-restrictive and over-optimistic. Chatterjee suggests that "primary sources are those sources which are direct, authoritative and not influenced by anybody's opinion ... The age of a primary source is of no importance. Primary sources of information are free from views or opinions; they are mere statements of facts or events" (p 23), and that "information based on authentic documents need not be verified" (p 24). In some sense these statements are true in relation to what most lawyers think of as primary sources ‑ legislation and case-law. A full report of a case in an established series might legitimately be thought of as an accurate report of what the court said, a report which will not lose its validity because of the passage of time, and one which the student can rely upon without corroboration. But the content of the report is not, presumably, uninfluenced by human opinion, unaffected by the passage of time, and beyond the need for further support. His definition, if sufficiently formal to be accurate in relation to case reporting, would also apply to what most lawyers would regard as secondary materials ‑ articles and texts. If Chatterjee is too optimistic about the value of what he defines as primary sources, he also seems strangely restrictive as to what constitutes a primary source. He notes that "only the original of a document of a primary nature is a primary source, not its photocopy or carbon copy", and that "any document which is not addressed to the public, nor meant for public use, cannot be relied upon for research" (p 24). 

These objections to Chatterjee's discussion of primary and secondary sources are not mere pedantry. This is a key area where post-graduate students often fall down, and clear guidance here would have been invaluable. If the text seeks to lay down a single standard, applicable to all the disciplines of legal studies, then it should at least have attempted to apply that standard to what most undergraduate lawyers are told are primary and secondary sources. If it sought to recognise the multiplicity of definitions, recognising that “sometimes the distinction between primary and secondary sources of information may not be clear” (p 29) it should have explored the area rather more fully. 

The discussion of these primary sources is also very disappointing. There is a list, without addresses or even a brief discussion of the type of materials available, of a range of libraries, government departments and research bodies. This lack of detail is especially marked when contrasted with the pages of addresses of United Nations libraries and organisations. The chapter would have benefited from some discussion of dealing with government departments; access to academic libraries (particularly copyright libraries), their catalogues, and COPAC; and using the Public Records Office. 

Chapter Six on the other hand, which deals with socio-legal research through interviewing and the use of questionnaires, is much stronger. The section on interviewing is useful, if brief. This is a very important tool for many law students, although they do not always realise it is a data gathering technique, with norms of good practice. Chatterjee makes the excellent point that the interviewer needs to be knowledgeable before interviewing in order to avoid straining the patience of the interviewee (p 32). This is particularly important where a student on a taught LL.M. is interviewing a local official or activist working in an area central to the subject of the LL.M. One bad interview can sour an organisation’s view of every future LL.M. student. The section would have benefited from some discussion of structuring, ordering, and recording issues. The advantages/disadvantages section is concise, but very useful for a student considering whether interviews could usefully form part of their methodology. The questionnaire section is very brief indeed, and such key issues as coding, data analysis, sampling, and the use of pilot studies needed to be explored.

The seventh chapter usefully details methods of conducting a literature search and approaches to analysing statutes, law reports and international conventions. The stress on case-law is particularly important as non-lawyers can neglect this area in favour of legislation. The text also mentions the possibilities of using a comparative approach but little is made of the potential dangers of this approach, which can seem a good idea to the student desperately searching for originality. A discussion of an historical approach to legal research would also have been appropriate here. This, however, remains the strongest chapter of the book and would be particularly useful to the student approaching legal research and analysis for the first time. 

The final section, on layout and presentation of the final piece of research is sound, but uninspiring and dogmatic. Something could have been made of the value of word processing tools. For instance, whilst using a common package such as Word for Windows, it is very easy to build up a mechanistic index, which can then be fine-tuned manually; a useful table of contents; and a consistent and clear set of styles. All of these can add markedly to the impact of the final product. 

Modern legal studies is wonderfully diverse, capable of bringing together insights from a wide variety of disciplines, as well as the unique contribution of doctrinal legal studies. A student considering a substantial piece of research in legal studies, therefore, is in serious need of guidance in preparing their research topic, selecting appropriate methodologies, and carrying them out in the context of legal scholarship. This need is particularly pressing if legal studies seeks to carve out a distinctive identity and traditions for itself, rather than fit into a model inherited from science, social science, or the humanities. For both these reasons, we welcomed the appearance of a text which sought to provide an introduction to legal research for these students.

We had hoped, however, for a different type of text. In particular, we had both imagined that such a text would serve as an introduction, not just to legal research methods at a postgraduate level, but the postgraduate researcher experience. By this we mean the practicalities ‑ and emotional consequences ‑ of gaining a place on a post-graduate programme; gaining funding for the programme; designing a sensible course of study for the programme, including the increasingly popular possibilities of part‑time study; and the realities of legal studies at this level. Additionally, we would expect such a text to provide an introduction, and guided further reading, to the wide range of methodologies employed in legal scholarship, such as socio-legal work, both qualitative and quantitative, traditional doctrinal work, comparative studies, and the role of legal history.

Bibliography.
Holborn, G (1993) Butterworth’s Legal Research Guide (London: Butterworths).
May, T (1995) Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process (Buckingham: Open University Press).
Phillips, E (1994) How to get a Ph.D. (Buckingham: Open University Press).
Robson, C (1993) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner Researchers (Oxford: Blackwell Press).