POLITICAL SCIENCE: THE STATE OF DISCIPLINE II, Ada W. Finifter, ed., American Political Science Association, 1993
15 Pages Posted: 21 Jun 2011
Date Written: 1993
Comparison is a fundamental tool of analysis. It sharpens our powers of description, and plays a central role in concept-formation by bringing into focus suggestive similarities and contrasts among cases. Routinely used in testing hypotheses, it can also contribute to the inductive discovery of new hypotheses and to theory-building. This chapter examines distinct perspectives from the past two decades on the comparative method – understood as the systematic comparison of a relatively small number of cases – focusing specifically on its relationship to experimental, statistical, and case-study approaches.
Three main areas of innovation and analytic alternatives have emerged which strengthen the viability of the comparative method: within-case analysis, quantitative techniques employing a relatively small number of cases, and systematic comparison of a small number of cases with the goal of causal analysis, as Lijphart originally advocated. All three of these approaches will persist; substantial exposure to and training in the basic writings on the philosophy of science and logic of inquiry can provide a framework for more informed choices about these methodological alternatives. In this way, the foundation can be laid for an eclectic practice of small-N analysis that takes advantage of opportunities on both sides of what could otherwise be a major intellectual divide.
Keywords: Case Study, Comparative, Experimental
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Collier, David, The Comparative Method (1993). POLITICAL SCIENCE: THE STATE OF DISCIPLINE II, Ada W. Finifter, ed., American Political Science Association, 1993. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1540884