In political science, a growing body of literature maintains that case studies do provide empirical ground for testing theory as far as procedures apply that clearly expose the probative power of evidence. We scrutinize argumentative, Bayesian, and set-theoretic procedures, and find that the former two can discipline discretion, yet not truly prevent biased conclusions about the fitting of cases to theory when used as stand-alone techniques -- while the latter relegates discretion to design issues, but cannot apply to N=1 studies.
Theory testing and small-N design / A. Damonte, B. Cotta. ((Intervento presentato al 3. convegno QCA tenutosi a Zürich nel 2015.
Theory testing and small-N design
A. DamontePrimo
;
2015
Abstract
In political science, a growing body of literature maintains that case studies do provide empirical ground for testing theory as far as procedures apply that clearly expose the probative power of evidence. We scrutinize argumentative, Bayesian, and set-theoretic procedures, and find that the former two can discipline discretion, yet not truly prevent biased conclusions about the fitting of cases to theory when used as stand-alone techniques -- while the latter relegates discretion to design issues, but cannot apply to N=1 studies.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
QCA3ew pres.pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: presentazione
Tipologia:
Pre-print (manoscritto inviato all'editore)
Dimensione
524.88 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
524.88 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.