ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

Most Different Systems Design×过程追踪×
领域Political Science心理测量学
方法族Process / pipelineLatent structure
起源年份19702005
提出者John Stuart Mill (method of agreement); Przeworski & Teune (systems framing)Alexander George, Andrew Bennett
类型Small-N comparative case-selection designQualitative causal inference
开创性文献Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley-Interscience. ISBN: 9780471701422Bennett, A., & Checkel, J. T. (Eds.). (2015). Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. Cambridge University Press. DOI ↗
别名MDSD, Most different cases design, Mill's method of agreement, Diverse systems design
相关35
摘要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.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Most Different Systems Design · Process Tracing. 于 2026-06-25 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare