Compare methods
Review your selected methods side by side; rows that differ are highlighted.
| Comparative Historical Analysis× | Most Similar Systems Design× | |
|---|---|---|
| Field | Political Science | Political Science |
| Family | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Year of origin≠ | 1979 | 1970 |
| Originator≠ | Theda Skocpol, Barrington Moore, James Mahoney & Dietrich Rueschemeyer (tradition) | John Stuart Mill (method of difference); Przeworski & Teune (systems framing) |
| Type≠ | Macro-causal, case-based comparative method with temporal emphasis | Small-N comparative case-selection design |
| Seminal source≠ | Mahoney, J., & Rueschemeyer, D. (Eds.) (2003). Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521016452 | Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley-Interscience. ISBN: 9780471701422 |
| Aliases | CHA, Macro-causal analysis, Historical-comparative method, Comparative historical sociology | MSSD, Most similar cases design, Mill's method of difference, Comparable cases strategy |
| Related≠ | 4 | 3 |
| Summary≠ | Comparative historical analysis (CHA) is a macro-causal research tradition that explains large-scale outcomes — revolutions, regime change, welfare states, development paths — by systematically comparing a small number of cases reconstructed in depth across historical time. It combines cross-case comparison with close attention to temporality: sequences, timing, critical junctures, and path dependence. Associated with Barrington Moore, Theda Skocpol, and codified by Mahoney and Rueschemeyer, CHA treats history not as background but as the medium through which causes operate. | The most similar systems design (MSSD) is a small-N comparative strategy that selects cases as alike as possible on many background characteristics but differing on the outcome of interest. By matching cases so that most potential confounders are held roughly constant, the design isolates the few factors that vary alongside the outcome as the candidate causes. Rooted in John Stuart Mill's method of difference and named by Przeworski and Teune, it is a cornerstone of comparative politics for drawing causal inferences from a handful of countries or cases. |
| ScholarGateDataset ↗ |
|
|