How to compare Week 5,

Sem 1, 2015/2016

ROHANA ABDUL HAMID

TECHNIQUES

• 1. CASE STUDIES

• 2. FOCUSED COMPARISON

• 3. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

1. Case studies

What is a case study ?

Intensive scrutiny of one case

Micro level and macro level analysis : the selection of cases. Thus, it is a case oriented , not variable oriented. Thick description. Multi-method : reading academic lit,

secondary documents, primary materials, interviews

What are cases ?

Individuals, organisations, processes, programs, institutions, events

RQ : How and why questions:

Examples of case studies

• 1) Graham Allison’s study of a single case (1971) about 1962 Cuban Missile Crises. He explained the crises by using three competing theories – U.S and Soviet Union performed as a) rationale actors, b) complex bureaucracies and c) politically motivated groups or persons.

• Single case study

Examples

2) A book about major strategies for improving social conditions by illustrating four policy topics : welfare reform, strengthening the child education, education reform and transforming neighborhoods. The book refers to specific cases of successful programs.

• Results : The writer develops generalization based on the case studies of the need for the successful programs to be results oriented

• Multiple case cross analysis

Example [case studies with multiple cases]

3) A book with 8 social programs . The commonalities in the program : the effectiveness of the programs [although many these policy programs often meets failure].

• However, the programs varied widely in their focus such as : education, nutrition, drug prevention, preschool education, delinquent youths, drug treatment, homelessness, mental health.

• Findings : can identify programs that are low in cost , programs that have convincing evidence of long term effects; enable the government to replicate the programs

Single case study : comparative?

1) Single case study can be subsumed under comparative method if it is theory-driven. How ?

a) Theory infirming and theory confirming case study : analysis of a single case within the framework of established generalizations. The case is the test of the proposition , which in turn may confirmed or infirmed by it.

….

b) Deviant case : studies of single case that are known to deviate from established generalizations.

So , why do we select the case ?

We want to uncover relevant variables that are not considered previously.

What is the theoretical value?

It weakens the original proposition , able to suggest modified proposition that may be stronger.

…..

• C) Representative case : Typical and standard example of a wider category. It is common, useful and undramatic.

• A collection of representation of cases (representative) will provide raw materials for later distillation/ subsequent generalizations.

Example : Coalition government – choose to study the phenomena in your country in detail. Home country is your research site, but you hope that the results would contribute to broader comparative understanding. HOW ?

Disadvantage of single case study and who do we do about it ?

• 1) What works in country A may not work in country B.

• Why ?

Contextual differences. But by drawinganalogies , case studies can encourage thesearch for more general knowledge .

Asking question : What differences betweencountries explain why the same policy led tocontrasting result ?

Other types of case study

4) Prototypical case study = The case is chosen because it is expected to become so.

Example : US has been used as a prototype case for democracy. Why ? This is because it is pioneering in democracy. Thus, when we study the case, it helps us to understand the phenomenon occurred elsewhere.

• 5) Archetypical case study = creates the category. • Example : French Revolution. Refer to French

revolution when you want to look at the study of revolution.

….

• 6) Critical type of case study : if it works here, it would work anywhere.

• Example: Imposing democracy in Iraq (case). Iraq – a country with little experience of democracy (a case). If democracy survives in Iraq, it would work anywhere such as Libya, Syria.

2. FOCUSED COMPARISON

• What is it ?

• A small N studies – concentrate on the intensive comparison ( of a political phenomenon)

• Choose a study because of the case

• The number of countries – either 2 ( paired , binary comparison) or 3 (triangular comparison)

Works well when few countries are compared over time.

How do you select the countries ?

• Apply two approaches : Most similar design and Most Different Design

Advantage of most similar design : the more similar units being compared, it is possible to isolate the factors responsible for differences between them .

Example : Social security programs in Canada and USA

….

• Advantage of Most Different design : Can test the relationship by finding out whether it can be observed in a range of different countries.

• If it is proven to be positive, our confidence that the relationship is real (the relationship is not on the basis of third factors, unmeasured variable)

• Example: If we find that plurality method of election of is associated with two-party system in the diverse group of countries, the robustness(strong, sturdy) in the relationship would increase.

Statistical Analysis

• Variable-based, not country specific.

• Large number of countries/cases. The data are used for generalisation.

• It permits us to explore covariation between variables.

• The variables – we can measure quantitatively.

• In statistical analysis, the variables are –dependent and independent.

Example of studies using statistical analysis :

1. The higher a person’s social status, the greater his/her participation in politics.

2. The more affluent (wealthy) a country, the more likely it is to be an established democracy.

• - Correlation : Positive or negative ?

• - Can you identify the dependent and independent variables?

Statistical approach

• Correlation : the association between variables

Correlation score is zero 0 : zero linear relationship

Correlation score , 0.5- 1 = strong correlation

Weak correlation = 0.1- 0.4

Graph : page 93-94

Risks to SA : 1) Spurious correlation

• When you have strong correlation between two variables, but the relationship of the variables (both or one) depend on third factor (unmeasured variable).

• How ? Consider correlation between income and political participation. The third unmeasured variable is likely to be education.

• Thus, we have to consider all variables (relevant) in our analysis (research)

2. The direction of causation

• Correlation is not able to determine the direction of causation. For instance ,

• A) x causes / promotes y or;

• B) y causes / promotes x

• Why ? This is because, correlation shows the association not the direction.