Compare methods
Review your selected methods side by side; rows that differ are highlighted.
| Most Different Systems Design× | Process Tracing× | |
|---|---|---|
| Field≠ | Political Science | Psychometrics |
| Family≠ | Process / pipeline | Latent structure |
| Year of origin≠ | 1970 | 2005 |
| Originator≠ | John Stuart Mill (method of agreement); Przeworski & Teune (systems framing) | Alexander George, Andrew Bennett |
| Type≠ | Small-N comparative case-selection design | Qualitative causal inference |
| Seminal source≠ | Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley-Interscience. ISBN: 9780471701422 | Bennett, A., & Checkel, J. T. (Eds.). (2015). Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. Cambridge University Press. DOI ↗ |
| Aliases≠ | MDSD, Most different cases design, Mill's method of agreement, Diverse systems design | — |
| Related≠ | 3 | 5 |
| Summary≠ | 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. | Process Tracing is a qualitative research method developed by George and Bennett (2005) for studying causal mechanisms and causal chains within individual cases. It involves examining the sequence of events and decision-making processes within a case to infer whether a hypothesized causal mechanism actually operated. Process tracing aims to strengthen causal inference in case studies by looking beyond correlation to understand how causes produce effects. |
| ScholarGateDataset ↗ |
|
|