Abstract
From this comprehensive case study we now turn to a systematic testing of major hypotheses derived from the literature (see chapters 2 and 4 in this book) across all cases. For this purpose, a relatively new technique “Qualitative Comparative Analysis” (QCA) (Ragin 1987) is most useful. This method, in spite of a number of important limitations, demonstrates particularly well the merits of rigorous and stringent comparative procedures. It is placed within the overall group of “case-oriented” as opposed to “variable-oriented” comparisons. It is qualitative and categorical, as opposed to macro-quantitative and probabilistic approaches (see also Aarebrot and Bakka 2006). In this way, context-sensitive and historically bound explanations can be explored which give equal importance to each particular case including deviant ones or outliers. While we cannot possibly claim to have taken account of all major hypotheses or approaches, we have at least selected a number of the better-known and characteristic ones which may help to illustrate systematic tests of this kind.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2012 Dirk Berg-Schlosser
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berg-Schlosser, D. (2012). Testing Major Hypotheses with “Qualitative Comparative Analysis”. In: Mixed Methods in Comparative Politics. Research Methods Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137283375_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137283375_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-34844-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-28337-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)