Attorney Sun publishes information and analysis across legal practice, law firm management, legal services, law and regulation, legal technology, and business, compliance and legal risk.
Because these subjects can involve changing laws, technical developments, professional standards and competing interpretations, a disciplined research process is central to responsible publishing.
This Research Methodology explains the principles Attorney Sun seeks to apply when researching and developing editorial material.
Purpose of Our Research
The purpose of research at Attorney Sun is to establish a reliable foundation for useful editorial content.
Research should do more than provide material for an article. It should help establish what is known, what has changed, where uncertainty exists, and which distinctions are necessary for readers to understand a subject accurately.
The research process may differ according to the subject, but the underlying objectives remain consistent:
- Accuracy
- Relevance
- Verifiability
- Appropriate context
- Clear distinction between fact and interpretation
- Responsible treatment of uncertainty
Identifying the Research Question
Before research begins, an article should have a clearly defined subject and purpose.
Researchers and contributors should establish what the article is actually attempting to explain, rather than collecting disconnected information simply because it relates to the general topic.
For legal subjects, this may involve identifying the relevant jurisdiction, legal issue, period and type of authority.
For technology subjects, it may involve identifying the specific technology, use case, implementation environment or professional problem being examined.
A clearly defined research question helps prevent unnecessary scope expansion and unsupported conclusions.
Source Selection
Sources should be selected according to their authority, relevance, reliability and proximity to the underlying information.
Depending on the subject, appropriate sources may include:
- Legislation
- Court decisions
- Government publications
- Regulatory authorities
- Official professional bodies
- Academic research
- Technical documentation
- Corporate filings
- Official company documentation
- Established research organizations
- Reputable industry publications
- Expert commentary
Not every article requires the same combination of sources.
A straightforward explanatory article may require a different research process from an article analyzing a developing regulatory issue or emerging technology.
Understanding the trajectory of legal AI, document automation, and legal tech research involves tracking developments from academic hubs like Stanford Law School’s CodeX Center for Legal Informatics
Primary Sources
Where appropriate, Attorney Sun gives particular weight to primary sources.
For legal and regulatory subjects, these may include legislation, judicial decisions, regulatory publications and official government material.
For technology, primary material may include official technical documentation, product documentation, security documentation, published specifications and direct statements from relevant organizations.
Primary sources do not automatically eliminate the need for interpretation. Their significance must still be understood within the relevant legal, technical or professional context.
Secondary Sources
Secondary sources can provide valuable explanation, historical context, comparative analysis and specialist commentary.
They may include academic articles, professional publications, established industry research and specialist commentary.
Secondary material should not be treated as authoritative merely because it is professionally presented or widely repeated.
Where a significant claim can reasonably be verified against a more authoritative underlying source, that source should be considered during the research process.
Cross-Checking Important Claims
Important factual claims should be cross-checked where reasonably practical.
Particular care should be taken with claims concerning:
- Legal requirements
- Regulatory obligations
- Court decisions
- Statistics
- Market size
- Company ownership
- Product capabilities
- Security claims
- Historical events
- Professional standards
- Financial or commercial information
If credible sources disagree, the disagreement should be investigated rather than concealed.
Where disagreement cannot reasonably be resolved, the article should communicate the relevant uncertainty.
Legal and Regulatory Research
Legal research requires particular attention to jurisdiction and date.
A statement about a legal requirement should not be treated as universally applicable when the underlying rule applies only to a particular jurisdiction.
Researchers should consider whether legislation, regulations, court decisions or administrative guidance have changed since the source was published.
Where a legal position is developing or subject to competing interpretations, the article should avoid presenting a disputed proposition as settled law.
Attorney Sun’s editorial content is not a substitute for legal research undertaken for a specific matter by a qualified legal professional.
Technology Research
Technology changes quickly, particularly in areas such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, cloud computing, legal software and automation.
Technology research should therefore distinguish between:
- Current capabilities
- Announced capabilities
- Planned capabilities
- Marketing claims
- Independent evidence
- Technical limitations
- Actual implementation requirements
A product announcement should not automatically be treated as evidence that a capability is widely available or performs as claimed in real-world conditions.
Where functionality, pricing or availability is likely to change, articles should avoid presenting temporary information as permanent.
Statistical and Quantitative Claims
Statistics can create a misleading impression of precision when their methodology or context is unclear.
When using quantitative information, researchers should consider:
- Who collected the data
- When it was collected
- The population or sample involved
- How the measurement was defined
- Whether the source remains current
- Whether the statistic supports the conclusion being drawn
A statistic should not be presented as universally representative when it relates only to a particular sample, jurisdiction, industry or period.
Distinguishing Fact From Interpretation
Attorney Sun seeks to distinguish established facts from analysis, interpretation and opinion.
For example, a documented regulatory change is a factual development. An assessment of what that change could mean for law firms is analysis.
Similarly, a software company’s stated product capability is a claim that can be reported. An independent conclusion about the practical implications of that capability requires appropriate evidence and qualification.
This distinction helps readers understand not only what is being stated, but also the basis on which it is being stated.
Handling Conflicting Information
Research does not always produce a single uncontested answer.
When reputable sources provide conflicting information, the editorial process may examine:
- The authority of each source
- The date of each source
- The underlying evidence
- Whether the sources address the same question
- Differences in definitions or methodology
- Jurisdictional differences
- Whether subsequent developments explain the disagreement
The objective is not to manufacture certainty where the evidence does not support it.
Artificial Intelligence in Research
Artificial intelligence tools may assist with research, organization, drafting or other editorial tasks where appropriate.
However, AI-generated information is not treated as inherently reliable.
AI systems can produce fabricated sources, incorrect quotations, inaccurate legal propositions, outdated information and plausible-sounding factual errors.
Important information should therefore be independently verified before publication.
AI assistance does not remove the responsibility to establish whether a published claim is accurate.
Contributor Research
External contributors are expected to conduct appropriate research for the subjects they submit.
Contributors should be able to explain the basis of significant factual claims when requested by the editorial team.
Contributors should not knowingly submit fabricated statistics, invented quotations, unsupported legal conclusions or misleading representations of research.
Attorney Sun may request clarification, additional sourcing or revisions before accepting contributed material.
Commercial and Vendor Information
When researching companies, products or services, Attorney Sun may consult official company material alongside independent sources.
Company statements can be useful for establishing what an organization says about itself, but they should be distinguished from independently verified facts.
Product descriptions should not automatically be treated as independent assessments of product performance.
Where a commercial relationship could materially affect the interpretation of content, appropriate disclosure may be considered under the publication’s editorial standards.
Research Limitations
No research process can eliminate every possibility of error.
Sources may be incomplete, outdated, inaccessible or themselves incorrect. Legal and regulatory issues may also involve unresolved questions where authoritative sources have not produced a definitive answer.
Attorney Sun therefore aims for evidence-based accuracy rather than an unrealistic claim of absolute certainty.
Where an important limitation affects a conclusion, the limitation should be reflected in the article.
Updating Research
Research does not necessarily end when an article is published.
Attorney Sun may review existing articles when significant developments occur, particularly where a change in law, regulation, technology or professional practice could materially affect the article.
Updated research may result in revisions, additions, corrections or removal of outdated information.
Readers can help identify developments by contacting the publication when they believe an article requires substantive review.
Corrections and Research Integrity
If credible evidence demonstrates that a published factual claim is materially incorrect, Attorney Sun may correct the article in accordance with its Editorial Guidelines.
The purpose of correction is to improve the reliability of the publication rather than conceal mistakes.
Where an error materially affects the substance of an article, an appropriate correction or editorial note may be used.
A Responsible Research Standard
Attorney Sun’s research methodology is designed to support a publication that values evidence, context and professional usefulness.
The standard is not simply to find information that supports a predetermined conclusion. Research should test important claims, identify relevant limitations and allow the available evidence to shape the resulting article.
The methodology may continue to evolve as Attorney Sun’s coverage expands and as research practices, technologies and professional standards develop.
We examine the intersection of legal practice, compliance, and technological change. Explore our legal industry research journal to access our latest commentary and expert contributions