Legal research, like any rigorous inquiry, should exhibit certain fundamental characteristics to ensure quality and reliability. When law students undertake research whether doctrinal, empirical or otherwise adhering to these characteristics improves the credibility and effectiveness of their work. Key characteristics of sound legal research include objectivity, analytical reasoning, clarity, and source-based inquiry, among others such as thoroughness, precision, and ethical integrity.
Unlock legal research, compliance, and case management expertise with our Advanced Training Program in Paralegal Studies & Legal Documentation. Self-paced, expert-led, and filled with real-world case studies to prepare you for success in law firms and corporate legal teams.
Characteristics of Legal Research
Legal research demands an objective approach. This means the researcher should strive to set aside personal biases or preconceived notions and let the evidence and law speak for themselves.
Objectivity in legal research requires that the researcher “develops views on the basis of relevant reasons and shuns irrelevant ones.”. In practice, this means you should base your conclusions on credible sources (cases, statutes, data) and sound logic, rather than cherry-picking information that supports a preferred outcome.
For example, if you personally believe a law is unjust, objective research would still require you to accurately describe the law and acknowledge any evidence that supports its effectiveness, even as you critique it. Objectivity is also reflected in tone in academic legal writing, one typically uses a neutral, analytical tone rather than emotive or biased language.
An objective researcher examines every question with care and thoroughness, relating their analysis to truth and evidence. This doesn’t mean researchers have no viewpoint or argument; it means their argument is grounded in facts and law, not just opinion. Maintaining objectivity also helps in credibility readers (or graders) trust research that appears even-handed and driven by evidence.
1. Analytical Reasoning
Legal research is not just about compiling facts, it is an analytical process. Analytical reasoning refers to the ability to break down complex legal issues into component parts, examine relationships, and apply logic to draw conclusions.
A good legal researcher doesn’t merely state that “Case A said X, Case B said Y.” They analyze how X and Y relate: are they consistent? What principle emerges? Analytical reasoning is used to interpret statutes (what does this provision mean in context?), to reconcile cases (why did outcomes differ? was it facts or legal principle?), and to apply law to hypothetical facts (a key skill in memos and exams).
Being analytical also means being critical – questioning assumptions, testing arguments, and considering counter-arguments. For instance, if your research question is whether a new policy is constitutional, analytical reasoning involves exploring both the argument that it is and the argument that it isn’t, weighing which side is stronger under legal doctrines.
2. Clarity
Clarity is a hallmark of good legal research and writing. No matter how profound your analysis or how extensive your research, if the results are not communicated clearly, their value is lost on the audience. Clarity has a few dimensions:
Clarity of Purpose: The reader should immediately grasp what the research is about – the question or thesis. A clear introduction and clear structure contribute to this.
Clarity of Analysis: Each step of the reasoning should be articulated plainly. Avoid unnecessary jargon or, if jargon is unavoidable (legal terms of art), define them for the reader. Make sure that your sentences and paragraphs convey one idea at a time in a logical flow. For example, don’t bury the lede; if a paragraph is about a case holding, start by stating the holding, then explain it. Use signposts (like “however,” “furthermore,” “for example”) to guide the reader through your argument.
Clarity of Language: Legal writing sometimes suffers from archaic or convoluted language. As researchers, aim for plain English where possible. For instance, instead of “It is submitted that,” one can often just say “Arguably,” or instead of “notwithstanding the fact that,” simply “although.” Clear writing often correlates with clear thinking.
3. Source-Based Inquiry
Legal research is inherently source-driven and every claim about the law must be supported by references to legal authority. Thus, a key characteristic is being thorough and careful in the use of sources. This means:
Reliance on Primary and Secondary Sources: Primary sources (legislation, case law, constitutions, etc.) are the bedrock. Secondary sources (scholarly articles, expert commentary) are used to support interpretation or provide context. A good legal research project demonstrates mastery of the relevant sources. For instance, if researching a doctrinal question, one should have consulted the major cases on point and any leading articles. The statement “Legal research is the finding and assembling of authoritative sources (‘authorities’) relevant to examine a question of law” underscores that the process is source-centric.
Accuracy in Citation: Proper attribution through footnotes or in-text citations is vital (as discussed in Chapter 3). But beyond format, the researcher must ensure that sources are accurately represented. Quoting or paraphrasing should not distort meaning. Citing the most up-to-date version of the law is also part of this (for example, checking if a statute has been amended or if there are recent cases up to the date of writing).
Comprehensiveness: Being source-based also means being comprehensive enough – not cherry-picking authorities that favor your argument while ignoring significant contrary authority. If there is a landmark case that goes against your thesis, you must engage with it rather than omit it or otherwise your research will lack credibility. Comprehensive research might involve digging into legislative history or comparing multiple jurisdictions if relevant in order to ensure you've not missed a crucial source.
Critical Use of Sources: Source-based doesn’t mean source-driven in the sense of just compiling quotes. A good researcher integrates sources into an analysis. They use sources as building blocks for arguments, not as a substitute for their own reasoning. Also, they distinguish between more and less authoritative sources (e.g., a Supreme Court case vs. a lower court case; a peer-reviewed article vs. an opinion blog). Giving appropriate weight to sources is part of the skill.
Also learn about Footnotes in legal research.
Other Key Characteristics:
Legal research requires a combination of careful analysis, clear organization, and ethical standards to produce reliable and impactful results. Here are the key characteristics that define effective legal research:
Thoroughness: Legal research needs to cover all the important angles of an issue. This means looking at laws, court cases and even data or policy debates if they’re relevant. You should check multiple sources, consider opposing views, and include background details when needed. While you have to be strategic due to time limits, missing a key law or fact can weaken your work.
Precision: Be exact in your research. Small word choices, like “may” vs. “shall” in a law, can make a big difference. Double-check quotes, case names, citations, and legal terms to make sure they’re correct. If you use data, like saying “52% agreed,” ensure it’s accurate and comes from a reliable source.
Logical Structure: Organize your research clearly so it’s easy to follow. A common method is IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion). Present your arguments in a sensible order, like strongest first or grouped by theme. A well-structured paper shows you’ve thought through the problem carefully.
Originality: While you’ll summarize existing laws, try to add your own perspective. This could be a new way of looking at a law, connecting different legal ideas, or sharing new findings. Even in a student paper, your unique take or argument matters—it shouldn’t just repeat what’s in textbooks. As one scholar put it, originality is a skill to develop intentionally.
Ethical Integrity: Be honest in your work. Always give credit to others’ ideas by citing sources, don’t make up or twist information, and handle data responsibly (like keeping it confidential if needed). If there are gaps or limits in your research, admit them openly.
Critical Thinking: Don’t just report facts—think critically. Question assumptions, spot biases in sources or laws, and consider their real-world impact. For example, you might point out that a law seems fair but affects people unequally. In academic work, it’s not enough to describe; you should evaluate and analyze, like questioning a court’s reasoning instead of just accepting it.
Explore Legal Research Topics.
Summary
The fundamental characteristics of legal research objectivity, analytical reasoning, clarity and source-based inquiry serve as quality control measures. They ensure that research is credible, understandable and useful. Legal research, whether for a class paper, a law review article or a court brief should aspire to these ideals. They distinguish rigorous research from mere opinion or careless work. For law students, internalizing these traits not only improves academic performance but also prepares them for the professional demands of legal practice. A lawyer’s work is often judged by the quality of their research and arguments and by being objective, analytical, clear, thorough and well-sourced, you enhance the persuasive power of your work and uphold the integrity of the legal discourse.
Related Posts:
Characteristics of Legal Research: FAQs
Q1. What is the primary purpose of legal research?
Legal research aims to identify, analyze and interpret relevant legal authorities, such as statutes, case law and regulations to address a specific legal issue or question accurately and effectively.
Q2. Why is precision important in legal research?
Precision is critical because legal research requires identifying exact legal provisions and precedents that apply to a case, as even minor errors can lead to incorrect conclusions or invalid arguments.
Q3. How does objectivity influence legal research?
Objectivity ensures that legal research is conducted impartially relying on verified legal sources and logical analysis rather than personal biases or assumptions in order to produce credible and defensible results.
Q4. What role does comprehensiveness play in legal research?
Comprehensiveness involves exploring all relevant legal materials including primary and secondary sources in order to ensure no critical authority or perspective is overlooked, providing a thorough foundation for legal arguments.
Q5. Why is legal research considered dynamic and evolving?
Legal research is dynamic because laws, regulations, and judicial interpretations change over time, requiring researchers to stay updated with current legal developments and adapt their findings accordingly.
