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.
Source record
Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.
- Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley-Interscience. · ISBN 9780471701422
- 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
- Gerring, J. (2007). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. · ISBN 9780521676564
Curated claims
Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.
This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.
Related methods
Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.