Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Most Different Systems Design× | Qualitative Comparative Analysis× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Political Science | Political Science |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1970 | 1987 |
| Grondlegger≠ | John Stuart Mill (method of agreement); Przeworski & Teune (systems framing) | Charles C. Ragin |
| Type≠ | Small-N comparative case-selection design | Set-theoretic, configurational comparative method |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley-Interscience. ISBN: 9780471701422 | Ragin, C. C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN: 9780520058347 |
| Aliassen | MDSD, Most different cases design, Mill's method of agreement, Diverse systems design | QCA, csQCA, fsQCA, Configurational comparative method |
| Verwant | 3 | 3 |
| Samenvatting≠ | 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. | Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a set-theoretic, configurational method that identifies which combinations of conditions are necessary or sufficient for an outcome across a set of cases. Developed by Charles Ragin, it treats each case as a configuration of set memberships, builds a truth table of all logically possible combinations, and uses Boolean algebra to minimize them into the simplest expressions that account for the outcome. It bridges qualitative case knowledge and cross-case generalization, embracing causal complexity through conjunctural causation, equifinality, and asymmetry. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|