LTStudijoje analizuojama teisės mokslo tyrimų įvairovė, požiūrių į teisės objektą skirtumai, teisės mokslo tyrimų skaitytojų vertinimai apie tai, kokio pobūdžio teisinių tyrimų Lietuvoje reikia, kokie šiems tyrimams turėtų būti keliami reikalavimai, vertinimo kriterijai. Analizuojama, kokiais požiūriais remiantis bei kokia apimtimi teisė gali būti tiriama, kiek teisės tyrimams taikytini bendrieji mokslo metodai. Taip pat iš apklaustų ekspertų nuomonių apibendrinama, kokių temų tyrimų šiuo metu labiausiai trūksta. [Iš leidinio]
ENArticle analyses diversity of legal research, as well as diversity and differences of attitudes towards the object of law, opinions of readers of legal research on the current researches, prioritized topics, criteria for quality researches, etc. Inquiry as well examines theoretical approaches to law and research of it, in what extent legal research is subject to general methods of science, what is the difference between the nature of object of legal research and nature of object of other sciences. As well, the opinions of interviewed experts on the need of particular topics for legal research are generalized. Inquiry consists of four main parts. The first one analyses possible ways of approaching the nature of legal research. This part delivers grouping of legal researches into internal and external, describes comparative research and scientific discussion. The second part determines quality criteria for legal inquiries. In order to be able to consider particular criteria first of all it is explained in what ways the object of law may be approached, whether the characteristics of the object of legal research are analogous to characteristics of other sciences, in what sense and extent legal research may be regarded as “objective”, in what extent requirements of novelty, relevance, use of innovative methods, requirement of interdisciplinary approach may be applied to legal inquiries, as well as how many researchers should participate in order the legal research could be regarded as “sufficiently objective”. The third part describes topics of research in need and fields of public life lacking legal research. Finally, the fourth part contains other important issues for the improvement of legal research. [From the publication]