ScholarGate
Assistent
Process / pipelineComparative / observational designs

Most Different Systems Design

The most different systems design (MDSD) is a small-N comparative strategy that selects cases that differ on as many background characteristics as possible yet share the same outcome. If wildly dissimilar cases nonetheless converge on the same result, the explanation cannot lie in the many features on which they differ — it must lie in whatever they have in common. Grounded in John Stuart Mill's method of agreement and named by Przeworski and Teune, it is the mirror image of the most similar systems design and a staple of comparative politics.

Åbn i MethodMindSnartAnvend, sammenlign, få vejledning
Værktøjer og ressourcer
Hent slides
Lær og udforsk
VideoSnart

Læs hele metoden

Kun for medlemmer

Log ind med en gratis konto for at læse dette afsnit.

Log ind

Metodekort

Nabolaget af beslægtede metoder — vælg en knude for at udforske.

Kilder

  1. Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley-Interscience. ISBN: 9780471701422
  2. Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294–308. DOI: 10.1177/1065912907313077
  3. Gerring, J. (2007). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521676564

Sådan citerer du denne side

ScholarGate. (2026, June 22). Most Different Systems Design (Comparative Method of Agreement). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/da/political-science/most-different-systems-design

Hvilken metode?

Stil denne metode ved siden af dens nærmeste slægtninge, og læs dem side om side — biblioteket lægger bøgerne på bordet; valget er dit.

Sammenlign side om side

Refereret af

ScholarGateMost Different Systems Design (Most Different Systems Design (Comparative Method of Agreement)). Hentet 2026-06-24 fra https://scholargate.app/da/political-science/most-different-systems-design · Datasæt: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026