Comparar métodos

	Análisis Múltiple de Conversaciones Basado en Casos	Análisis Comparativo de la Conversación
Campo	Cualitativa	Cualitativa
Familia	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Año de origen	CA founded ~1960s–1970s; multi-case extension adopted from late 1990s onward	1974 (CA foundation); comparative applications from 1980s–1990s
Autor original	Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff, Gail Jefferson (CA); multiple-case design from Robert Yin	Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff, Gail Jefferson (CA foundation); comparative extension developed across the field from the 1980s onward
Tipo	Qualitative multi-case analytic design	Qualitative micro-analytic research design
Fuente seminal	Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.	Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Alias	multi-case CA, cross-case conversation analysis, comparative conversation analysis, multiple-instance CA	comparative CA, cross-contextual conversation analysis, comparative interactional analysis, comparative talk-in-interaction
Relacionados	5	3
Resumen	Multiple case-based conversation analysis applies the fine-grained sequential methods of Conversation Analysis (CA) across two or more distinct cases — settings, groups, or interactions — to identify both case-specific patterns and cross-case regularities in naturally occurring talk. By examining how participants organise turn-taking, repair, and action sequences in multiple contexts, the approach strengthens claims about interactional phenomena beyond what a single-case study can establish.	Comparative Conversation Analysis (comparative CA) applies the rigorous micro-analytic methods of Conversation Analysis across two or more contrasting interactional settings, languages, cultures, or participant groups. It examines how the sequential organisation of talk — turn-taking, repair, adjacency pairs, and action formation — varies or remains stable across contexts, producing cross-contextual evidence about the architecture of human interaction.