Content Analysis of the Criminal Law Doctrines Journal: Thematic Trends, Academic Participation, and Research Gaps

Objective: Content analysis of academic journals is an effective tool for assessing the state of knowledge production, identifying thematic trends, and evaluating the structure of scholarly participation in different fields. This study aims to analyze the content of articles published in the Criminal Law Doctrines journal between 2011 and 2024, with the purpose of identifying scientific and practical trends, comparing thematic orientations, and highlighting research gaps.

Method: The study is descriptive–analytical in nature and based on quantitative content analysis. The statistical population consists of 261 articles published in 27 issues of the journal during the years 2011–2024. Data regarding article title, authors, academic rank, institutional affiliation, gender, authorship structure, and thematic focus were extracted and analyzed using Microsoft Excel.

Findings: The results reveal that the journal has maintained relative stability with gradual growth in the number of published articles. More than 60% of the articles were authored by academics holding the rank of assistant professor or higher, with doctoral students also making a notable contribution. However, female authors accounted for only about 12% of the total contributors. The thematic analysis shows that the most frequent subject areas were criminal policy (17.2%), international criminal law (15.7%), and criminology (13.4%). In contrast, topics such as general criminal law, criminal procedure, and juvenile justice were less represented, reflecting a greater concentration on strategic and international issues compared to classical or emerging areas. Authorship patterns were predominantly individual or dual-authored, while collaborative or interdisciplinary research was rare.

Conclusion: The study demonstrates that while the Criminal Law Doctrines journal has consolidated its position quantitatively, it faces significant challenges in terms of thematic, gender, and geographic diversity. These findings emphasize the need for editorial policies that encourage broader participation and greater thematic balance. In particular, expanding research into underrepresented topics and promoting interdisciplinary collaboration could enhance the journal’s scholarly quality and strengthen its alignment with contemporary research needs. The findings of this study can help scientific policymakers, journal editors, and graduate researchers in designing targeted calls for proposals, developing new research themes, and selecting dissertation topics. In addition, the model presented in this study can be considered a model for the scientific evaluation of other specialized legal and humanities journals.