I85PREP
⌘ K
Saber Pro Investigación Jurídica study materials
Saber Pro Investigación Jurídica study resources

Saber Pro Investigación Jurídica practice questions

One question at a time. Build your Saber Pro Investigación Jurídica understanding.

First 50 of 190 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A law student in Medellín reads that municipal crews removed street vendors from a plaza and writes in a notebook: “Street vending is a social problem.” For the Saber Pro module Investigación Jurídica, which formulation converts that social fact into a researchable objeto of investigación jurídica or sociojurídica?

  1. Poverty in the city center must be ended as soon as possible.
  2. How do municipal public-space rules and inspection practices operate when street vendors occupy that plaza? Correct answer.
  3. Which party should vendors support in the next local election?
  4. How can the student obtain a vendor’s permit for a relative this week?

Explanation

Evidencia 1.1 asks the candidate to identify problems that can be treated as objects of investigación jurídica or sociojurídica. A researchable object names a legal or institutional referent (public-space rules, inspection practices) and a question that legal or sociolegal methods can answer. A slogan, a partisan preference, or a client-service task is not yet that object.

Question 2Legal research questions, sources and coherence

In Colombian legal research, investigación jurídica often reconstructs norms and jurisprudencia, while investigación sociojurídica links those norms to social practices. Which proposal is a sociojurídica research object rather than a purely dogmatic one?

  1. How labor inspectors in Cali’s informal markets actually apply subordination criteria during workplace visits. Correct answer.
  2. Reconstructing the legislative history of a single Código Sustantivo del Trabajo article from published travaux.
  3. Identifying which Code article a clinic should cite in tomorrow’s demanda.
  4. Drafting an employment contract template for a family business.

Explanation

A sociojurídica object asks how law operates in a social setting: inspectors, markets, and applied criteria. Reconstructing legislative history remains a jurídica/dogmatic or historical-legal object. Selecting a citation or drafting a contract are practice tasks, not research objects.

Question 3Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A faculty committee screens undergraduate thesis ideas for the Investigación Jurídica competence. Which proposal cannot be treated as an objeto of investigación jurídica or sociojurídica?

  1. Whether an environmental license was issued after the legally required community consultation steps.
  2. How first-instance judges in a circuit apply a published line of jurisprudencia on informal labor.
  3. Whether a proposed pedestrian bridge’s steel grade meets a civil-engineering load standard. Correct answer.
  4. Whether two lines of Corte Constitucional reasoning on equality are internally coherent.

Explanation

Investigación Jurídica objects are problems that legal or sociolegal methods can address: consultation duties, judicial application of jurisprudencia, or doctrinal coherence. A steel-grade calculation is an engineering question. It may appear in a case file, but it is not itself a legal or sociolegal research object.

Question 4Legal research questions, sources and coherence

During a seminar, a classmate insists that “access to justice is the problem.” Which restatement is a researchable objeto for Investigación Jurídica?

  1. Access to justice must improve in Colombia.
  2. Peace is a constitutional value that everyone should share.
  3. The student will win more tutelas next semester.
  4. What barriers do rural users face when trying to file a tutela in municipal courts of Huila? Correct answer.

Explanation

Evidencia 1.1 rewards converting a slogan into a delimited question with a legal mechanism (tutela), a population (rural users), and a setting (Huila municipal courts). Value statements and personal practice goals do not yet constitute a research object.

Question 5Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Which of the following is a valid objeto of investigación jurídica (dogmatic), as opposed to a free-standing moral opinion?

  1. Whether Colombians are honest in everyday life.
  2. How the Corte Constitucional has constructed the equality test applied to public-sector hiring disputes in a defined period. Correct answer.
  3. Whether the researcher personally admires the 1991 Constitution.
  4. Which political candidate would best protect workers.

Explanation

A dogmatic investigación jurídica object reconstructs and evaluates legal reasoning-here, a court’s equality test in a bounded set of hiring disputes. Personal admiration, national character, and electoral preference are not legal-method objects.

Question 6Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A consultorio jurídico student is preparing a housing case and also drafting a thesis proposal. Which question is a research problem rather than a professional-practice decision?

  1. Which remedy should I file tomorrow for this client?
  2. Should I settle if the landlord offers two months’ rent?
  3. Which remedies do public-university legal clinics in Bogotá actually use in housing cases, and with what recorded outcomes over three years? Correct answer.
  4. How do I fill the court’s cover sheet without a rejection stamp?

Explanation

Investigación Jurídica distinguishes a researchable object from the next procedural move in a live file. Comparing clinic remedies and outcomes across a defined set of cases is sociojurídica research. Tomorrow’s filing, settlement, or form-filling are practice.

Question 7Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A proposal is titled “The crisis of the family in Colombia” and states no court, no comisaría, no statutory institution, and no jurisprudencia. The best diagnosis under evidencia 1.1 is that the proposal:

  1. States a social diagnosis that is not yet an objeto of investigación jurídica or sociojurídica. Correct answer.
  2. Already satisfies Investigación Jurídica because “family” appears in the Civil Code.
  3. Is automatically sociojurídica because it mentions Colombia.
  4. Is valid as Comunicación Jurídica and therefore counts for this module.

Explanation

Without a legal or institutional referent, “family crisis” remains a social diagnosis. Naming an institution (comisaría, alimentos process, visitation orders) would open a legal or sociolegal object. Mere presence of a civil-law word, a country name, or a different Saber Pro module does not convert the slogan into Investigación Jurídica.

Question 8Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A student announces the research problem: “To prove that the 1991 Constitution is the best constitution in the world.” Which reformulation is a researchable investigación jurídica object?

  1. To celebrate the Constitution in a patriotic essay.
  2. To rank countries by the researcher’s personal preference.
  3. To show that all criticism of the Constitution is illegitimate.
  4. To compare how a specific constitutional mechanism (for example, tutela standing) is designed and how selected courts have applied it. Correct answer.

Explanation

“Best in the world” is a value judgment that cannot be tested as an Investigación Jurídica object. A delimited comparison of a mechanism’s design and judicial application can. Celebration, preference ranking, and silencing criticism are not research problems.

Question 9Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A classmate proposes: “Design a mediation session for two neighbors who argue about a wall.” For Investigación Jurídica (not Gestión del Conflicto), which version is a researchable object?

  1. The script the student will read as mediator next Saturday.
  2. How municipal conciliation centers document agreements and what legal effects those agreements later produce in local litigation. Correct answer.
  3. Which neighbor is morally right about the wall.
  4. How to calm both parties using only body language.

Explanation

This module tests research design, not conflict-management performance. Documentation practices and the legal effects of conciliation agreements are sociojurídica objects. The live mediation script, a moral verdict, and body-language technique belong to other competences.

Question 10Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A proposal’s “problem” is: “Interview all magistrates of the Corte Suprema de Justicia this semester to know what they really think.” The main defect under evidencia 1.1 is that the student has:

  1. Confused an infeasible data-collection wish with a delimited research object about law or legal practice. Correct answer.
  2. Chosen the only valid method for any investigación jurídica.
  3. Correctly treated unpublished private opinions as a substitute for jurisprudencia.
  4. Satisfied the module by naming a high court.

Explanation

A research object is a question about norms, institutions, or legally relevant practices that methods can address. “Interview everyone on the Court this semester” is a sampling fantasy, not a problem. Published decisiones, a feasible sample of despachos, or a reconstructed line of jurisprudencia would be objects; private opinions are not a shortcut around that work.

Question 11Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Which of the following is the sociojurídica research object?

  1. How the 1936 constitutional reform text treated property, based only on the published constitutional text and debates.
  2. The correct filing fee for a civil claim in the student’s own case.
  3. How notaries in Bucaramanga currently advise clients on property transfers that mention a land-restitution annotation. Correct answer.
  4. The wording of a clause the student will insert in a private sale tonight.

Explanation

Sociojurídica research examines legal institutions in social practice: notarial advice in a defined city on transfers that raise restitution annotations. Text-and-debates reconstruction is historical-legal or dogmatic. Filing fees and clause drafting are practice.

Question 12Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A first draft states the problem as “What is law?” The advisor asks for a version that evidencia 1.1 would recognize as an objeto. Which version is properly delimited?

  1. What is justice in the abstract?
  2. Why do people dislike lawyers?
  3. Is law good or bad?
  4. How do first-instance labor judges in Atlántico characterize “subordination” in platform-work cases decided 2022–2025? Correct answer.

Explanation

A usable object specifies an institution (labor judges), a legal concept in use (subordination), a population of cases (platform work), a place, and a time. Abstract definitions of law or justice, popularity of lawyers, and good/bad labels are not Investigación Jurídica objects.

Question 13Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A viral video shows an administrative eviction in a small municipality. A student wants to “research the video.” Which formulation is a researchable legal or sociolegal object?

  1. Whether the video is entertaining.
  2. What legal basis and due-process steps the municipality used (or skipped) in that class of administrative evictions, and how residents experienced those steps. Correct answer.
  3. How to make a more viral follow-up video.
  4. Which commenters on social media were ruder.

Explanation

A media event is a prompt, not an object. Investigación Jurídica requires a legal referent (basis and due process of eviction) and, if sociojurídica, a link to lived practice. Entertainment, virality, and comment-thread tone are not that object.

Question 14Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Which comparative proposal is a valid investigación jurídica object?

  1. How two countries’ consumer cooling-off rules are designed and how selected agencies apply them to distance contracts. Correct answer.
  2. Which country is more ethical, in the student’s opinion.
  3. Which constitution “feels fairer” according to the student’s classmates, with no rule compared.
  4. A ranking of countries by GDP presented as a ranking of legal quality, with no legal rules compared.

Explanation

Comparative investigación jurídica is a valid object when it specifies legal rules and how named authorities apply them. Personal ethics rankings, unanalyzed “feelings” about constitutions, and GDP-as-justice tables are not legal-method objects.

Question 15Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A student proposes to study “whether God justifies civil disobedience.” Which alternative is an Investigación Jurídica object?

  1. How Colombian courts have treated claims of conscientious objection in a defined statutory setting and period. Correct answer.
  2. Whether the student believes in God.
  3. Which sermon is theologically correct.
  4. Whether civil disobedience feels inspiring.

Explanation

Theology and personal faith are not this module’s objects. Judicial treatment of conscientious-objection claims in a bounded legal setting is investigación jurídica (and may become sociojurídica if practices are added). Belief, sermon correctness, and inspiration are not.

Question 16Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A literature map shows abundant doctrina and jurisprudencia on protection orders, but almost no empirical description of how comisarías in one city process requests. Which statement correctly identifies a researchable objeto?

  1. There is nothing left to research because doctrina already exists.
  2. The student should copy a foreign thesis and change the city name.
  3. The gap itself is not a problem until a politician mentions it.
  4. The implementation gap in that city’s comisarías is a sociojurídica object that doctrina alone does not answer. Correct answer.

Explanation

Evidencia 1.1 includes spotting problems that legal knowledge has not yet treated as empirical objects. An implementation gap in a named institution is a classic sociojurídica object. Existing doctrina does not close that gap, copying a thesis is unethical and not a problem statement, and political mention is not a prerequisite.

Question 17Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A proposal states a single “problem”: “the legal nature of crypto-assets and users’ trust in exchange platforms.” The most accurate Investigación Jurídica diagnosis is that the student has:

  1. Stated one sociojurídica object, because trust is always legal.
  2. Joined two distinct objects (dogmatic qualification of an asset and sociolegal perception of platforms) that need separate questions or an explicit mixed-methods design. Correct answer.
  3. Stated a Comunicación Jurídica problem about drafting terms of service.
  4. Already aligned title, objectives, and problem by using the word “and.”

Explanation

Legal nature is a dogmatic qualification; user trust is a sociolegal perception. They can be combined only if the design states two questions or a mixed strategy. Concatenating them with “and” does not create one object, does not make trust automatically legal, and does not satisfy evidencia 1.2 alignment.

Question 18Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A student writes the problem as “Is Sentencia T-xxx correctly decided?” Which version becomes a genuine investigación jurídica object rather than a personal dissent?

  1. Would I have voted the other way if I sat on the Court?
  2. Do I like the outcome for my client’s industry?
  3. By which stated interpretive canons and internal consistency tests can the Court’s reasoning be reconstructed and evaluated in this line of cases? Correct answer.
  4. Which journalist praised the ruling on television?

Explanation

A yes/no “correctly decided” question collapses into opinion unless the student specifies evaluative criteria (canons, consistency with a line of cases). Personal counterfactual votes, industry liking, and media praise are not research objects.

Question 19Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A proposal claims it will “measure justice” by asking 30 litigants in one café whether they feel happy. The core defect as an objeto of investigación sociojurídica is that:

  1. The construct is not tied to a legal institution or observable legal practice, so happiness scores cannot yet count as a sociojurídica object. Correct answer.
  2. Sociojurídica research forbids all interviews.
  3. Thirty people is the official ICFES sample size for every thesis.
  4. Happiness is the only valid indicator of due process.

Explanation

Sociojurídica objects link law to social phenomena through a specified institution (notification, hearing wait, enforcement). Untethered happiness in a café does not. Interviews are allowed when they serve a legal object; ICFES does not publish a thesis sample-size cut in this module’s guide; happiness is not a proxy for due process.

Question 20Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A community organizes a protest after a mining project is announced. A student wants that protest to be the thesis. Which formulation is a researchable objeto of investigación jurídica or sociojurídica?

  1. Whether protests are fashionable this year.
  2. Which slogan rhymes better.
  3. How many journalists attended.
  4. How consulta previa (or its omission) was carried out relative to the applicable legal design, and how the community experienced that procedure. Correct answer.

Explanation

A protest is a social event. The legal/sociolegal object is the consultation procedure’s legal design and operation (or omission) and the community’s experience of that procedure. Fashion, rhyme, and press counts are not Investigación Jurídica objects.

Question 21Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Title: “Barriers to enforcement of alimentos (child-support) orders in municipal courts of Pasto.” Which general objective is aligned with that title and a corresponding problem?

  1. To draft a brand-new Civil Code for the country.
  2. To analyze the procedural and institutional barriers that delay enforcement of alimentos orders in Pasto municipal courts. Correct answer.
  3. To teach parenting skills in local schools.
  4. To campaign for a candidate who mentions children.

Explanation

Evidencia 1.2 requires title, problem, and objectives to share the same object, place, and cognitive task. Analyzing enforcement barriers in Pasto matches the title. A new code, parenting workshops, and a campaign change the object entirely.

Question 22Legal research questions, sources and coherence

General objective: “Analyze the implementation of protection orders in Bogotá comisarías de familia.” Which set of specific objectives correctly operationalizes that general objective?

  1. Reconstruct the applicable legal framework; document how officers process requests; identify processing bottlenecks. Correct answer.
  2. End gender-based violence nationwide; elect new officials; close all comisarías.
  3. Write a novel; design a logo; launch a podcast about feelings.
  4. Prove that protection orders are useless without reading any file.

Explanation

Specific objectives should be narrower cognitive tasks that, together, achieve the general objective. Framework, processing practices, and bottlenecks do that. Outcome slogans, media products, and predetermined “proof” without data do not.

Question 23Legal research questions, sources and coherence

The title is “Dogmatic analysis of the Corte Constitucional’s line on informal labor.” The stated problem is “What do street vendors in Cali feel about the police?” The alignment defect is that:

  1. Feelings are the only proper object of dogmatic analysis.
  2. Cali is the seat of the Corte Constitucional, so the match is automatic.
  3. The title announces a dogmatic object while the problem announces a sociolegal perception object that the title does not cover. Correct answer.
  4. Any title that contains “análisis” aligns with any problem.

Explanation

Evidencia 1.2 fails when title and problem name different objects. Dogmatic analysis of a constitutional line is not the same as vendors’ feelings about police. Geography and the word “análisis” do not repair the mismatch. The student must change the title, the problem, or both.

Question 24Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Which statement is a research objective rather than a mere activity or method?

  1. Conduct twenty interviews.
  2. Print the survey on colored paper.
  3. Travel to the archive on Tuesdays.
  4. Characterize how users experience notification of hearings in a named municipal court. Correct answer.

Explanation

Objectives state what the researcher will know or explain. Interviews, printing, and travel are methods or logistics. Characterizing users’ experience of a legal practice (notification) is a cognitive objective that can later choose interviews as a method.

Question 25Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Title and problem both concern labor judges in Cali, 2023–2025. Which general objective breaks that alignment?

  1. To analyze how Cali labor judges characterized subordination in platform-work rulings from 2023 to 2025.
  2. To describe how Latin American high courts have treated platform work since 1991. Correct answer.
  3. To identify patterns in Cali first-instance platform-work decisions in that window.
  4. To reconstruct the legal reasoning of the Cali sample described in the title.

Explanation

Alignment requires the same object, level of court, place, and period. Jumping from Cali first-instance judges (2023–2025) to all Latin American high courts since 1991 changes every boundary. The other three objectives stay inside the title’s frame.

Question 26Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Title: “How one comisaría de familia in Ibagué processes protection-order requests.” Which general objective is misaligned because it is far broader than the title and is not a cognitive research task?

  1. To describe the request-to-decision workflow in that Ibagué comisaría.
  2. To identify documentary bottlenecks in the same office’s protection-order files.
  3. To transform Colombian family law in a single undergraduate project. Correct answer.
  4. To reconstruct the legal steps that office applies to protection-order requests.

Explanation

Evidencia 1.2 fails when the general objective explodes the title’s scale or replaces knowing with reforming the entire legal system. Describing, identifying bottlenecks, and reconstructing steps remain inside one office. “Transform Colombian family law” is a political wish, not an aligned objective.

Question 27Legal research questions, sources and coherence

General objective: “Characterize notification practices in two municipal courts of Tunja.” Which specific objective is misaligned because it is broader than the general objective?

  1. Map how all Latin American judiciaries notify parties in every type of process. Correct answer.
  2. Describe the documents those two Tunja courts use to notify in the selected process.
  3. Record typical time from filing to first notification in those two courts.
  4. Identify who physically delivers notices in the same two courts.

Explanation

Specific objectives must be narrower than the general objective. A hemisphere-wide map of every process outranks “two municipal courts in Tunja.” Document types, time-to-notice, and delivery personnel stay nested under the general objective.

Question 28Legal research questions, sources and coherence

The title is “Sociojurídica study of waiting times for first hearings in Cartagena’s small-claims court.” The problem is written as “Does article X of the Código General del Proceso exist?” The alignment error is that:

  1. Waiting times can only be studied by asking whether an article exists.
  2. Small-claims courts are excluded from Investigación Jurídica.
  3. The title is empirical-operational while the problem is a closed doctrinal existence question that the title does not pose. Correct answer.
  4. Any statutory citation automatically aligns title and problem.

Explanation

Title, problem, and objectives must pose the same kind of question. Existence of a code article is a yes/no doctrinal fact; waiting times in a named court are an empirical sociojurídica object. Citing a statute does not by itself create alignment.

Question 29Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A student lists as the “research problem”: “To demonstrate that municipal judges in Pereira are corrupt.” Relative to evidencia 1.2, the main defect is that this sentence is:

  1. A perfectly aligned general objective because it uses the word “demonstrate.”
  2. A predetermined verdict, not a problem that title and objectives can investigate in an open way. Correct answer.
  3. The only ethical way to study courts.
  4. Required by ICFES as a pass/fail thesis statement.

Explanation

A problem poses a question; it does not announce the finding in advance. “Demonstrate that judges are corrupt” is a closed verdict. Title and objectives cannot be aligned with an inquiry that has already decided the answer. ICFES does not require this module to be treated as a pass/fail thesis exam.

Question 30Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Title: “Experiences of indigenous litigants using the municipal court in a named Amazonian municipality.” Which objective set is aligned?

  1. Survey only Bogotá corporate litigants about commercial arbitration.
  2. Interview appellate magistrates in Europe about civil codes.
  3. Document how those indigenous users in that municipality navigate filing, language, and notification, and how the court responds. Correct answer.
  4. Measure stock prices of companies unrelated to the court.

Explanation

Population, place, and legal practices in the title must reappear in the objectives. Indigenous users’ filing, language, and notification in that municipality do. Corporate Bogotá arbitration, European magistrates, and stock prices change the object.

Question 31Legal research questions, sources and coherence

General objective: “Analyze enforcement of labor conciliation agreements in two inspectorates.” Which specific objective jumps to a later solution stage and therefore fails evidencia 1.2 alignment?

  1. Draft and enact a complete new labor code before describing any file. Correct answer.
  2. Describe how those inspectorates record whether agreements were paid.
  3. Identify typical reasons for non-payment in the sampled files.
  4. Reconstruct the legal effects the agreements claim to produce.

Explanation

Specific objectives should unpack the general analysis, not skip to national recodification with no empirical or dogmatic path. Recording payment, reasons for non-payment, and claimed legal effects are aligned specifics. Proposing a new code belongs, if at all, after findings (afirmación 2), and even then only as a legal solution coherent with results.

Question 32Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Which trio is internally coherent for evidencia 1.2?

  1. Title: tutela standing in municipal courts; problem: how to win the student’s own pending tutela; objective: a campaign slogan for local elections.
  2. Title: notarial fees in Bucaramanga; problem: Antarctic environmental treaties with no link to those fees; objective: to rank law schools by prestige.
  3. Title: Superintendencia consumer complaints; problem: constitutional control of treaties; objective: interviews only with infants who are not the users.
  4. Title: “Dismissal of protection-order requests in two Manizales comisarías”; problem: which documented reasons those offices use to dismiss; general objective: to characterize those dismissal reasons. Correct answer.

Explanation

Coherence means the same object appears in title, problem, and objective. Dismissal reasons in two named comisarías do. The other trios mix a practice file, an unrelated treaty object, or a population that cannot be the users of the titled institution.

Question 33Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A student lists as “specific objectives”: (1) theoretical framework, (2) state of the art, (3) annexes. The advisor should say that these items are:

  1. The only objectives ICFES accepts in Investigación Jurídica.
  2. Chapter or document labels, not cognitive objectives that operationalize a problem. Correct answer.
  3. Automatically aligned with any title.
  4. Sociojurídica methods because they sound academic.

Explanation

Theoretical framework, state of the art, and annexes are parts of a document, not statements of what will be known about a legal or sociolegal object. Evidencia 1.2 looks for objectives that unpack the problem (characterize, reconstruct, compare, identify mechanisms).

Question 34Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Title and problem both limit the study to labor inspectorate files from 2020 to 2022 in Barranquilla. Which objective breaks the time alignment?

  1. Classify inspection outcomes in Barranquilla files dated 2020–2022.
  2. Compare 2020 and 2022 notification language in the same inspectorate.
  3. Explain labor inspection in New Granada from independence to the present. Correct answer.
  4. Count how many 2021 files in that office record a follow-up visit.

Explanation

Period is part of alignment. A two-century colonial-to-present explanation is not the 2020–2022 Barranquilla object. Classification, comparison inside the window, and a 2021 count remain aligned.

Question 35Legal research questions, sources and coherence

The problem and general objective are descriptive: “What sequence of acts appears in land-restitution files in a named office?” All of the specific objectives instead promise a randomized experiment that will “prove a causal law of judicial psychology.” The alignment defect is:

  1. A change of cognitive level: the specifics answer a different kind of question than the problem and general objective. Correct answer.
  2. Description is forbidden in investigación sociojurídica.
  3. Experiments are the only valid method in Investigación Jurídica.
  4. Psychology is automatically a legal solution.

Explanation

Title, problem, and objectives must share not only topic but cognitive task. A descriptive reconstruction of file sequences is not the same project as a causal experiment in judicial psychology. Description is legitimate; experiments are not mandatory; psychology is not a legal solution.

Question 36Legal research questions, sources and coherence

The problem asks why protection orders are not enforced (an explanatory sociojurídica question). The title is “Inventory of the norms that mention protection orders.” The best alignment fix is to:

  1. Keep both unchanged because both mention protection orders.
  2. Replace the problem with a clinic intake script for one live client.
  3. Drop all legal referents so the thesis becomes journalism.
  4. Either retitle toward enforcement mechanisms in practice, or rewrite the problem as a dogmatic inventory question-not both at once as if they were the same object. Correct answer.

Explanation

Sharing a noun (“protection orders”) is not alignment. An explanatory practice question and a normative inventory are different objects. The student must pick one and make title, problem, and objectives match. A live-client intake script and journalism without a legal referent are not alignment fixes.

Question 37Legal research questions, sources and coherence

The title promises a mixed design: dogmatic reconstruction of a line of jurisprudencia and ethnography of a comisaría. The general objective says only “compile sentencias.” The alignment problem is that the general objective:

  1. Is too ethical because it cites courts.
  2. Covers only the dogmatic half of the titled object and omits the ethnographic half. Correct answer.
  3. Is perfect because compiling is always ethnography.
  4. Satisfies Gestión del Conflicto instead.

Explanation

If the title commits to two components, the general objective must encompass both or the title must be narrowed. Compiling sentencias addresses only the dogmatic half. Compilation is not ethnography, and this is not the conflict-management module.

Question 38Legal research questions, sources and coherence

General objective: “Analyze barriers to filing tutelas in rural notaries’ waiting rooms in Huila.” Which specific-objective set is properly nested rather than a word-for-word clone or an unrelated leap?

  1. Analyze barriers to filing tutelas in rural notaries’ waiting rooms in Huila (identical wording three times).
  2. Rewrite the Constitution’s preamble; design a national app with no user study.
  3. Describe who is present in those waiting rooms; reconstruct the information they receive about tutela; identify documented obstacles to filing from that site. Correct answer.
  4. Prove that notaries should disappear, then skip data.

Explanation

Nested specifics break the general task into smaller cognitive pieces (who is there, what information, which obstacles) without cloning or abandoning the object. Identical repetition is not operationalization; recodification and predetermined abolition are misaligned leaps.

Question 39Legal research questions, sources and coherence

The “problem” names a live clinic client and asks “What should I file for this person on Monday?” The title is “A study of housing remedies in public clinics.” The correct evidencia 1.2 diagnosis is:

  1. The problem is a professional-advice question for one file, so it does not match a research title about a class of clinic remedies. Correct answer.
  2. Any clinic client automatically is a research population of adequate size.
  3. Monday deadlines convert practice into investigación jurídica.
  4. The module forbids studying clinics at all.

Explanation

A research title about a class of remedies cannot be aligned with a single-client “what do I file Monday” problem. Clinics can be research sites if the problem is about patterns, practices, or outcomes across a defined set-not the next move in one live matter. Deadlines do not convert practice into research.

Question 40Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Title and general objective both promise a sociojurídica account of how a Superintendencia actually handles consumer complaints. The problem is written only as “What should the law be, ideally, in a perfect republic?” The alignment failure is that the problem is:

  1. Too empirical, because ideals are data.
  2. A Comunicación Jurídica oral exam.
  3. Automatically aligned because “law” appears in both.
  4. A free-standing de lege ferenda wish that neither describes the Superintendencia’s practice nor reconstructs a dogmatic object named in the title. Correct answer.

Explanation

De lege ferenda (what the law ought to be) can follow findings; it is not a substitute for the titled sociojurídica object. “Law” as a shared word does not align an ideal republic with an agency’s complaint handling. Ideals are not data, and this is not Comunicación Jurídica.

Question 41Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A sociojurídica thesis reports twelve interviews with users of one municipal court in Popayán. Which conclusion is actually supported?

  1. Every judge in Colombia fails at notification.
  2. In this sample, users described recurring delays and confusion at the notification window of that court. Correct answer.
  3. The Código General del Proceso is void for all cases nationwide.
  4. No further research on notification is ever needed.

Explanation

Evidencia 2.1 requires conclusions that do not outrun the evidence. Twelve interviews in one court support claims about that sample’s reported experience. They do not void a code, indict every judge, or close a research agenda.

Question 42Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A file review finds that the median time to first listing in a named court is eight months. Which inference is warranted?

  1. In that court and period, first listings were typically delayed relative to a timely hearing as a practical matter; constitutional validity of the whole statute is a separate legal question not settled by the median alone. Correct answer.
  2. The statute is automatically unconstitutional in every circuit.
  3. Judges should be criminally prosecuted based only on the median.
  4. Eight months is legally identical to eight days.

Explanation

A descriptive finding about delay supports a bounded operational conclusion. Jumping to nationwide unconstitutionality or criminal liability requires additional legal tests and facts. Time units are not interchangeable.

Question 43Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A survey of 80 litigants shows that those who had a lawyer reported shorter perceived waits. The researcher did not control for case type or court. Which statement is the soundest conclusion?

  1. Having a lawyer is proven to cause shorter waits in all Colombian processes.
  2. Courts that see lawyers are illegal.
  3. The association appears in this survey but cannot, without a design that addresses confounders, be treated as a demonstrated causal effect. Correct answer.
  4. Perceived wait is meaningless in sociojurídica research.

Explanation

Evidencia 2.1 includes not inflating associations into causes. Lawyer presence may track simpler cases or different courts. Perceived wait can still be a sociolegal indicator; it is just not a nationwide causal law on this design.

Question 44Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A study finds that a high share of labor conciliation agreements in two inspectorates were never paid. Which research effect is a fair derivation?

  1. All labor law should be repealed tomorrow.
  2. Inspectors should be jailed without a process.
  3. The finding is irrelevant to access to justice.
  4. The result raises a follow-on sociojurídica question about enforcement mechanisms and the practical value of conciliation as a legal path. Correct answer.

Explanation

Effects of research are implications for knowledge and for legally relevant problems, not instant repeals or punishments. Non-payment findings reasonably reopen questions about enforcement and about what conciliation delivers. They do not, by themselves, abolish labor law or impose criminal sanctions.

Question 45Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A dogmatic thesis codes holdings in 15 published sentencias of one high court on informal work. Which conclusion overreaches?

  1. In this set, the Court used a recurring set of criteria to characterize subordination.
  2. Nationwide workplace inspections empirically follow those 15 holdings in every municipality. Correct answer.
  3. Two of the holdings appear in tension on the treatment of platform work.
  4. The sample is too small to describe all possible future holdings, so claims stay inside the 15.

Explanation

Dogmatic coding of published holdings supports claims about that line of jurisprudencia, including internal tensions. It does not, without fieldwork, describe empirical inspection practice nationwide. Staying inside the 15 is the disciplined conclusion.

Question 46Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Findings: in a sampled court, 70% of examined files showed failed first notification. Which conclusion stays with the findings?

  1. Colombians as a people do not believe in law.
  2. Notification never occurs in any Latin American court.
  3. In this sample, first notification often failed, which is a legally relevant implementation problem for that court. Correct answer.
  4. Failed notification proves that oral culture is the only cause.

Explanation

Derive the conclusion at the same grain as the data: a high failure rate of first notification in the sample is an implementation finding. National character, continental universals, and a single cultural cause are not in the files.

Question 47Legal research questions, sources and coherence

Qualitative interviews with 10 victims of domestic violence (who consented) yield a theme: fear of retaliation after filing. The researcher writes “73% of Colombian women experience this.” The error is:

  1. Converting a qualitative theme in a small, non-probability sample into a fake national percentage. Correct answer.
  2. Using interviews at all in sociojurídica work.
  3. Mentioning fear, which is never legally relevant.
  4. Obtaining consent, which invalidates qualitative research.

Explanation

Evidencia 2.1 forbids dressing themes as census statistics. Ten interviews can support a theme; they cannot produce 73% of Colombian women. Interviews, fear as a barrier to using legal protection, and consent remain appropriate when not overclaimed.

Question 48Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A comparison of two notification protocols finds no meaningful difference in default rates. Which handling of that result is intellectually honest?

  1. Delete the comparison chapter and claim a huge success anyway.
  2. Invent a 40-point gap because journals prefer drama.
  3. Switch the outcome variable after seeing the result until a star appears.
  4. Report the absence of a difference as a finding that constrains later soluciones jurídicas. Correct answer.

Explanation

A null or no-difference result is still a result. Hiding, fabricating, or fishing after the fact are unethical and also invalidate conclusions. Honest reporting limits which legal solutions can later be called “supported by the study.”

Question 49Legal research questions, sources and coherence

In a dogmatic study, the student treats one memorable paragraph from a famous sentencia as if it were the entire line of jurisprudencia, ignoring later clarifying holdings. The warranted conclusion practice is to:

  1. Treat the paragraph as a statute that repealed all later cases.
  2. Reconstruct the line, including later holdings that narrow or explain the paragraph, before claiming what “the Court holds.” Correct answer.
  3. Cite no sentencia at all so the quote looks original.
  4. Replace reconstruction of the line with a secondary digest that quotes only the same memorable paragraph.

Explanation

When jurisprudencia is the object (or the data for a dogmatic claim), conclusions must follow the line, not a single quotable fragment. Erasing later holdings, hiding the source, or substituting a selective secondary digest all distort the finding.

Question 50Legal research questions, sources and coherence

A study shows that users who received a written explanation of the next procedural step were less likely to miss a hearing in one court. Which statement correctly separates a derived effect from a slogan?

  1. The finding proves that “justice is love” as public policy.
  2. The finding requires dissolving the judiciary.
  3. The finding supports a bounded inference that informational design at that step is associated with attendance in this setting; it does not by itself enact a national slogan. Correct answer.
  4. The finding is useless because it is not a new code article.

Explanation

Evidencia 2.1 distinguishes what the data imply from political mottos and institutional demolition. A local association between written explanation and attendance is a real, limited effect. It is not useless merely because it is not already a statute.