Abstract
This article aims at illustrating the circumstances in which Qualitative
Comparative Analysis (QCA) and its ramifications, fs/QCA and MVQCA,
become particularly useful tools of analysis. To this end, we discuss the most
pertinent problem which researchers encounter when using QCA: the problem of
contradicting observations. In QCA analysis, contradictions arise from the sheer
number of cases and the problem of dichotomisation. In order to handle
contradictions, the method for analysing middle-sized-N situations should
therefore be chosen according to two parameters: the size of a dataset, and the
need to preserve raw-data information. While QCA is an apt tool for analysing
comparatively small middle-sized datasets with a correspondingly reduced
necessity to preserve cluster information, the opposite holds true for fs/QCA.
MVQCA strikes a balance between these two methods as it is most suitable for
analysing genuinely middle-sized case sets for which some cluster information
needs to be preserved.
| Original language | Undefined/Unknown |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 33-50 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | International Journal of Social Research Methodology |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 2009 |
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver