Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research

  • James Mahoney (a1) and Gary Goertz (a2)
Abstract

The quantitative and qualitative research traditions can be thought of as distinct cultures marked by different values, beliefs, and norms. In this essay, we adopt this metaphor toward the end of contrasting these research traditions across 10 areas: (1) approaches to explanation, (2) conceptions of causation, (3) multivariate explanations, (4) equifinality, (5) scope and causal generalization, (6) case selection, (7) weighting observations, (8) substantively important cases, (9) lack of fit, and (10) concepts and measurement. We suggest that an appreciation of the alternative assumptions and goals of the traditions can help scholars avoid misunderstandings and contribute to more productive “cross-cultural” communication in political science.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Christopher H.Achen 2005a. Let's put garbage-can regressions and garbage-can probits where they belong. Conflict Management and Peace Science 22: 327–39.

Christopher H.Achen 2005b. Two cheers for Charles Ragin. Studies in Comparative International Development 40: 2732.

Christopher H.Achen , and DuncanSnidal . 1989. Rational deterrence theory and comparative case studies. World Politics 41: 143–69.

Joshua D.Angrist , and Guido W.Imbens 1995. Two-stage least squares estimation of average causal effects in models with variable treatment intensity. Journal of the American Statistical Association 90: 431–42.

Joshua D.Angrist , Guido W.Imbens , and DonaldRubin . 1996. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91: 444–55.

NathanielBeck . 2006. Is causal-process observation an oxymoron? Political Analysis 10.1093/pan/mpj015.

Kenneth A.Bollen , and Robert W.Jackman 1985. Regression diagnostics: An expository treatment of outliers and influential cases. Sociological Methods and Research 13: 510–42.

Kenneth A.Bollen , and PamelaPaxton . 1998. Detection and determinants of bias in subjective measures. American Sociological Review 63: 465–78.

Bear F.Braumoeller 2003. Causal complexity and the study of politics. Political Analysis 11: 209–33.

Stephen G.Brooks , and William C.Wohlforth 2000. Power, globalization, and the end of the Cold War: Reevaluating a landmark case for ideas. International Security 25: 553.

Stephen G.Brooks , and William C.Wohlforth 2002. From old thinking to new thinking in qualitative research. International Security 26: 93111.

DavidCollier , and StevenLevitsky . 1997. Democracy with adjectives: Conceptual innovation in comparative research. World Politics 49: 430–51.

DavidCollier , and James E.MahonJr. 1993. Conceptual stretching revisited: Adapting categories in comparative analysis. American Political Science Review 87: 845–55.

P.Dawid 2000. Causal inference without counterfactuals (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association 95: 407–50.

Robert D.English 2002. Power, ideas, and new evidence on the Cold Wars end: A reply to Brooks and Wohlforth. International Security 26: 7092.

David A.Freedman 1991. Statistical models and shoe leather. In Sociological methodology, ed. P.Marsden San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

J.Goodwin , and ThedaSkocpol . 1989. Explaining revolutions in the contemporary Third World. Politics and Society 17: 489509.

ThedaSkocpol . 1979. States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
MathJax

Metrics

Altmetric attention score