scholarly journals The Logic of Qualitative Comparative Analysis

1998 ◽  
Vol 43 (S6) ◽  
pp. 105-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles C. Ragin

Social scientists often face a fundamental dilemma when they conduct social research. On the one hand, they may emphasize the complexity of social phenomena – a common strategy in ethnographic, historical and macro social research – and offer in–depth case studies sensitive to the specificity of the things they study. On the other hand, they may make broad, homo genizing assumptions about cases, and document generalities – patterns hold across many instances. Research strategies that focus on complexity are often labeled “qualitative”, “case–oriented”, “small–N”, or “intensive”. Those that focus on generality are often labeled “quantitative”, “variable–oriented”, “large–N”, or “extensive”. While the contrasts between these two types social research are substantial, it is easy to exaggerate their differences and t o caricature the two approaches, for example, portraying quantitative work on general patterns as scientific but sterile and oppressive, and qualitative research on small Ns as rich and emancipatory but journalistic. It is important to avoid these caricatures because the contrasts between these two general approaches provide important leads both for finding a middle path between them and for resolving basic methodological issues in social science Social scientists who study cases in an in–depth manner often see empiri cal generalizations simply as a means to another end – the interpretive understanding of cases. In this view, a fundamental goal of social science is t o interpret significant features of the social world and thereby advance our collective understanding of how existing social arrangements came about and why we live the way we do. The rough general patterns that social scientists may be able to identify simply aid the understanding of specific cases; they are not viewed as predictive. Besides, the task of interpreting and then representing socially significant phenomena (or the task of making selected social phenomena significant by representing them) is a much more immediate and tangible goal. In this view, empirical generalizations and social science theory are important – to the extent that they aid the goal interpretive understanding.

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-119
Author(s):  
Emily Hauptmann

ArgumentMost social scientists today think of data sharing as an ethical imperative essential to making social science more transparent, verifiable, and replicable. But what moved the architects of some of the U.S.’s first university-based social scientific research institutions, the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research (ISR), and its spin-off, the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), to share their data? Relying primarily on archived records, unpublished personal papers, and oral histories, I show that Angus Campbell, Warren Miller, Philip Converse, and others understood sharing data not as an ethical imperative intrinsic to social science but as a useful means to the diverse ends of financial stability, scholarly and institutional autonomy, and epistemological reproduction. I conclude that data sharing must be evaluated not only on the basis of the scientific ideals its supporters affirm, but also on the professional objectives it serves.


2009 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 448-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franz Schultheis ◽  
Patricia Holder ◽  
Constantin Wagner

Today Pierre Bourdieu is well known as one of the most important social scientists of the 20th century. One of the outstanding qualities of his work has been his innovative combination of different methods and research strategies as well as his analytical skills in interpreting the obtained data (his ‘sociological gaze’). In this paper, we attempt to retrace the development of an extraordinary way of doing social research and show the benefit of Bourdieu's visual sociology for his empirical fieldwork and sociological theory. The article particularly stresses the significance of his photographic archive, which has long been ignored within the appreciation of Bourdieu's work. Studying Bourdieu's photography gives access to his æuvre in several new ways: not only can we understand how Bourdieu became an unconventional sociologist practicing his craft in the midst of a colonial war. Bourdieu's visual anthropology also offers an insight into the status nascendi of Bourdieu's sociology in all its elementary forms and contents. Through his photography Boudieu demonstrated the concepts of ‘ habitat and habitus’, the material and symbolic living conditions of the Algerian population.


1988 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nicholson

The Economic and Social Research Council recently published a Report commissioned from a committee chaired by Professor Edwards, a psychiatrist, so that the Council, and the social science community in general, might know what was good and bad in British social sciences, and where the promising future research opportunities lie over the next decade. Boldly called ‘Horizons and Opportunities in the Social Sciences’, the Report condensed the wisdom of social scientists, both British and foreign, and concludes with a broadly but not uncritically favourable picture of the British scene.


2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALEXANDRA HUNEEUS

AbstractThis article argues that human rights law – which mediates between claims about universal human nature, on the one hand, and hard-fought political battles, on the other – is in particular need of a richer exchange between jurisprudential approaches and social science theory and methods. Using the example of the Inter-American Human Rights System, the article calls for more human rights scholarship with a new realist sensibility. It demonstrates in what ways legal and social science scholarship on human rights law both stand to improve through sustained, thoughtful exchange.


Author(s):  
Henrik Halkier

The present paper explores some possible links between linguistics and social science, departing from an example of textual analysis originating in research in progress. Particular attention is paid to the characteristics of historical textual analysis and to the relationship between social phenomena and the concepts employed by social scientists. It is argued that the presence of common theoretical problems and shared methodologies provides an interesting starting point for future interdisciplinary research and for up-to-date teaching of post-graduate students.


2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hodgkinson

This article is a response to a speech addressed to the Economic and Social Research Council which was made, in February this year, by the UK Secretary of State for Education and Employment, David Blunkett. The speech was entitled ‘Influence or Irrelevance: can social science improve government?’ . Blunkett's programme for engaging social science in the policy process is far from unique and many of the arguments have been heard before. However, the curiosity of the speech lies in the fact that the conception of social science which Blunkett advocates mirrors the approach New Labour itself has to politics and government. This raises some rather interesting difficulties for social scientists. How do we engage in a debate about the role of social scientific research in the policy process when our own conception of the discipline may be radically at odds with that of the government? Furthermore, New Labour's particular conception of the relationship between social and policy-making means that we not only have to contest their notion of what it is we do, but also challenge their conception of the policy process. We cannot ignore this engagement, even if we wanted to. The challenge is to address it and to do so, moreover, in terms which Blunkett might understand. This article is an attempt to start this process.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 195-217
Author(s):  
Aaron Ola Ogundiwin, ◽  
Joel N. Nwachukwu

Abstract The paper underscores the place of theories in organizing social science data and experience. It holds that theories are indispensable to social research (The North-South divide notwithstanding), in view of the fact that the framework of knowledge and experience within which theories are established make a meaningful explanation of the world phenomenon reasonably possible. It delineates political philosophy and history of ideas from theory and thus, takes care of common mistake social scientists make differentiating between them. Furthermore, the paper on one hand, takes on the scientific requisites of theory such as assumption, concepts (and their functions), hypothesis (and its characteristics typology), law, models, paradigm and provides lucid conceptual analysis of each with a view to showing their relatedness to theory but not as synonyms to it. On the other hand, we singled out dependency theory in its emanation from knowledge and experience of underdevelopment of Third World countries, as the first and perhaps most relevant theoretic explanation of Africa’s underdevelopment. The paper posits that a good theory that will serve as a rudder for formulation of research questions, problem statement, as well as sustain the data analysis, and findings must parade some, if not all of the following qualities: precision and testability, empirical validity, parsimony, stimulation, and practicability.


1971 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-82
Author(s):  
Walter F. Weiker

In a previous article I sought to appraise the field of Turkish studies, for the most part among western (predominantly American) scholars (MESA Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 3, October 15, 1969). To fill out the picture, it is appropriate to also view the state of social research among the rapidly growing body of Turkish teachers and researchers. This article is not, however, a direct parallel to others in the MESA “State of the Art” series, in that it is not basically bibliographical. Such a review would require far more time, space, and knowledge in depth of several other social science disciplines than is currently available to me, because despite the remarks made below about problems of definition, the quantity and technical sophistication of work by Turkish researchers is quite large and is growing rapidly. Furthermore, since most of the research referred to below is in Turkish, the number of persons to whom a bibliographic review might be useful is quite limited. Instead, I think it would be more interesting to MESA members and other American social scientists to examine the characteristics and problems of what is probably one of the most vigorous social science communities in the “developing” countries, with a view (among other things) to helping facilitate increased cooperation between Turkish and American scholars in our common endeavors of advancing the state of knowledge.


1982 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartmut Kliemt ◽  
Bernd Schauenberg

AbstractThe theory of games, though at first greeted with great expectations by some social scientists, soon became a source of frustrated hopes to many of them. Too much of the theory seemed to be devoted to “zero-sum” and “one-shot” games. But most social contexts are not zero-sum and involve repeated interaction too. There was a certain lack of such game theoretic models which could be successfully adapted to social phenomena as were apt to appear in reality. Recently the theory of games seems to be on its way to closing this gap within a special branch devoted to “repeated games” or “supergames”. Very promising is the approach of Michael Taylor which is surveyed and discussed in the subsequent paper. This approach has two main merits: First it can be understood with a modest mathematical background, secondly it can be adapted easily to a more precise reconstruction of classical topics in political theory. Though one might not agree with some of Taylor’s conclusions it seems to be worthwhile to get acquainted at least with the basics of his analysis and to take it as a first step to opening avenues for future social research.


1970 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Dev Raj Dahal

Social science informs about the ideals and trains experts to deal with the complex social realities. It has a public purpose rooted in what we call dharma (professional and institutional responsibility) as opposed to the arrogance of reason, self-will and self-rationalization intrinsic to contemporary rational choice and modernity. Learning has a synergy - establishing connection between the world of social science theories and the drama of social life. A lack of mutual learning between Nepal's traditional faith intellectuals and modern reason-based social scientists has created a big hiatus and contradiction. The academic life of social scientists in Nepal is completely outside of spiritual, moral and ethical influence experienced by ordinary public. The spiritual blindness of modern social scientists has thus opened multiple gaps between their worldview and those of the citizens on various frontiers--theoretical knowledge and practical experience, technical understanding and composite knowledge and secularity of social science and the vitality of the Hindu-Buddhist scriptures in the popular mind, culture, behavior and practices. This has reinforced a division between the system of knowledge of social scientists and the life-world of people. The proponents of new social movements in Nepal, such as women, Dalits, Janajatis, Madhesis, youths and marginalized population are seeking a structural shift in reason-based knowledge to both reason and feeling in social science knowledge discovery. This movement can open the "captive mind" to social learning of contextual knowledge, conduct research with the citizens, provide inputs to the policy makers and reverse their linear, structure-bound, rationalist and disciplinary thinking into the one that represents what the Nepal mandala, the Nepali space, is really like and how to improve it for the better. The renewal and indigenization of qualitative social science research is important to overcome the spirited challenges posed by social forces in Nepal and contribute to the application of scientific reasoning in public policy and social change.Key Words: social movement, NepalDOI = 10.3126/dsaj.v2i0.1356Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol.2 pp.1-30


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document