Comparative Research Questions • Why SBY and Democrat Party had successful in the 2004 and 2009 Presidential Election? • Why the social-demoratic political parties have successful in Latin America? • Why western countries are more prosperous than eastern countries? Why different methods? The distinction between different comparative methods, based upon: 1) The particular research question, 2) The time and resources of the researcher, 3) The method with which the researcher is comfortable, 4) The epistemological position he or she adopts. Methods of Comparison Based on Sartori (1970) and Mair (1996) 1st method COMPARING MANY COUNTRIES ‘large-n’ Comparison The large number of countries makes this method of comparison particularly suited to quantitative analysis of aggregate data collected on different measures that vary across many countries (Lijphart 1971). Example work: Democracy and Development (Przeworski et al. 2000) includes 150 countries from 1950 to 1990 ‘large-n’ Comparison: An Assessment Strengths Weaknesses/challenges Statistical control Invalid measures Limited selection bias Data availability Extensive scope Too abstract/high level of generality Strong inferences and good for theory-building Time-consuming Identify deviant countries Mathematical and computer training 2nd method COMPARING FEW COUNTRIES ‘small-n’ Comparison • The country is often the unit of analysis, and the focus tends to be on the similarities and differences among countries rather than the analytical relationships between variables. • There are two main types of research design: compare different outcomes across similar countries, which is known as the Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD); and compare similar outcomes across different countries, which is known as the Most Different Systems Design (MDSD). ‘small-n’ Comparison: An Assessment Strengths Weaknesses/challenges Control by selecting MSSD or MDSD Less secure inferences Good for theory-building Selection bias: 1. Choice of countries 2. Choice of historical account Intensive, less variableoriented Language training Avoid ‘conceptual stretching’ Field research Thick description Areas studies Configurative analysis Macro-history 3rd method COMPARING SINGLE COUNTRIES Why different methods? A single-country study is considered comparative if it uses concepts that are applicable to other countries, develops concepts that are applicable to other countries, and/or seeks to make larger inferences that stretch beyond the original country used in the study. Many examples are: Tocqueville’s (1888) Democracy in America, Dahl’s (1961) Who Governs?, Lijphart’s (1968) The Politics of Accommodation (the Netherlands), O’Donnell’s (1973) Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism (Argentina), Varshney’s (2002) Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life (India), etc. Case Study Comparison: An Assessment Strengths Weaknesses/challenges Intensive, ideographic, path-dependent, and configurative analysis. Insecure inferences Six types: 1. Atheoretical 2. Interpretive 3. Hypothesis-generating 4. Theory-confirming 5. Theory-infirming 6. Deviant countries Selection bias: 1. Choice of countries 2. Choice of historical account Language training Field research