Skip to main content
×
Home

Data Access and Research Transparency in the Qualitative Tradition

  • Colin Elman (a1) and Diana Kapiszewski (a2)
Abstract

As an abstract idea, openness is difficult to oppose. Social scientists from every research tradition agree that scholars cannot just assert their conclusions, but must also share their evidentiary basis and explain how they were reached. Yet practice has not always followed this principle. Most forms of qualitative empirical inquiry have taken a minimalist approach to openness, providing only limited information about the research process, and little or no access to the data underpinning findings. What scholars do when conducting research, how they generate data, and how they make interpretations or draw inferences on the basis of those data, are rarely addressed at length in their published research. Even in book-length monographs which have an extended preface and footnotes, it can sometimes take considerable detective work to piece together a picture of how authors arrived at their conclusions.

Copyright
References
Hide All
American Political Science Association. 2012. A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science, Second Edition. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.
Beach Derek, and Pedersen Rasmus Brun. 2013. Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Bennett Andrew. 2010. “Process Tracing and Causal Inference.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, Second Edition, eds. Brady Henry E. and Collier David. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Bennett Andrew, and Checkel Jeffrey, eds. Forthcoming. Process Tracing in the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Collier David. 2011. “Understanding Process Tracing.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44 (4): 823–30.
Druckman James N., Green Donald P., Kuklinski James H., and Lupia Arthur. 2011. “Experiments: An Introduction to Core Concepts in Political Science.” In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, eds. Druckman James N., Green Donald P., Kuklinski James H., and Lupia Arthur. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Goertz Gary, and Mahoney James. 2012. A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Grofman Bernie, and Schneider Carsten. 2009. “An Introduction to Crisp Set QCA, with a Comparison to Binary Logistic Regression.” Political Research Quarterly 62 (4): 662–72.
Lupia Arthur, and Elman Colin. 2014. “Openness in Political Science: Data Access and Research Transparency.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (1): this issue.
Mahoney James. 2012. “The Logic of Process Tracing Tests in the Social Sciences.” Sociological Methods & Research 20 (10): 128.
Moravcsik Andrew. 2014. “Transparency: The Revolution in Qualitative Research.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (1): this issue.
Ragin Charles. 2000. Fuzzy Set Social Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ragin Charles. 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Schatz Edward, ed. 2009. Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Schneider Carsten, and Wagemann Cladius. 2010. “Standards of Good Practice in Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy-Sets.” Comparative Sociology 9 (3): 397418.
Sekhon Jasjeet S. 2004. “Quality Meets Quantity: Case Studies, Conditional Probability, and Counterfactuals.” Perspectives on Politics 2 (2): 281–93.
Yanow Dvora, and Schwartz-Shea Peregrine. 2006. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Recommend this journal

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

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 11
Total number of PDF views: 123 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 395 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 19th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.