 Why Causal Mechanisms and Process Tracing Should Alter Case Selection GuidanceRyan Saylor Sociological Methods & Research, 2020, vol. 49, issue 4, 982-1017 Abstract: Advice on case selection in small- N research emphasizes controlling for confounding variables to facilitate inferential tests of a cross-case pattern. Yet many researchers embrace the “mechanismic worldview†and aim to construct explanations. Explanations differ from inferences because one explains an outcome at the individual case level. Hence, explanatory case studies are not simultaneously inferential tests, rendering prevailing case selection guidance ill fitting. This article provides an alternative outlook on case studies and case selection. It conceives of case studies as things that engage an analytical ideal type. Researchers can construct case-specific explanations by coupling the general claims of an ideal type with contextual analysis. In terms of case selection, if a case has contextual features that make it relatable to an ideal type, one can viably study that case in relation to the ideal type, regardless of the case’s other characteristics. This criterion diverges sharply from the conventional wisdom on case selection and can embolden unconventional comparisons. Keywords: case selection; qualitative methods; causal inference; explanation; causal mechanisms; process tracing; ideal types (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:somere:v:49:y:2020:i:4:p:982-1017 Access Statistics for this article More articles in Sociological Methods & Research |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.