Contrasting Variable-Analytic and Case-Based Approaches to the Analysis of Survey Datasets: Exploring How Achievement Varies by Ability across Configurations of Social Class and Sex

The context for this paper is the ongoing debate concerning the relative merits, for the analysis of quantitative data, of, on the one hand, variable-analytic correlational methods, and, on the other, the case-based set theoretic methods developed by Charles Ragin. While correlational approaches, based in linear algebra, typically use regression to establish the net effects of several “independent” variables on an outcome, the set theoretic approach analyses, more holistically, the conjunctions of factors sufficient and/or necessary for an outcome to occur. Here, in order to bring out key differences between the approaches, we focus our attention on the basic building blocks of the two approaches: respectively, the concept of linear correlation and the concept of a sufficient and/or necessary condition. We initially use invented data (for ability, educational achievement, and social class) to simulate what is at stake in this methodological debate and we then employ data taken from the British National Child Development Study to explore the structuring of the relationship between respondents' early measured ability and later educational achievement across various configurations of parental and grandparental class origin and sex. The substantive idea informing the analysis, derived from Boudon's work, is that, for respondents from higher class origins, ability will tend to be sufficient but not necessary for later educational achievement while, for lower class respondents, ability will tend to be necessary but not sufficient. We compare correlational analyses, controlling for class and gender, with fuzzy set analyses to show that set theoretic indices can better capture these varying relationships than correlational measures. In conclusion, we briefly consider how our demonstration of some of the advantages of the set theoretic approach for modelling empirical relationships might be related to the debate concerning the relation between observed regularities and causal mechanisms.

[1]  R. Turner Sponsored and Contest Mobility and the School System , 1960 .

[2]  C. Lacey Hightown Grammar: the school as a social system , 1971 .

[3]  Paul E. Meehl,et al.  Nuisance variables and the ex post facto design , 1970 .

[4]  Second Edition,et al.  Statistical Package for the Social Sciences , 1970 .

[5]  J. M. MARSTRAND Measure for Measures , 1971, Nature.

[6]  Peter Abell,et al.  Model building in sociology , 1972 .

[7]  J. Earman,et al.  The Cement Of The Universe , 1974 .

[8]  Raymond Boudon The logic of sociological explanation , 1974 .

[9]  R. Bhaskar A realist theory of science , 1976 .

[10]  P. Pettit The Possibility of Naturalism. , 1981 .

[11]  Stanley Lieberson,et al.  Making It Count: The Improvement of Social Research and Theory , 1987 .

[12]  N. D. Pidgen,et al.  The Comparative Method , 1987 .

[13]  Edward M. Hundert,et al.  The Cement of the Universe , 1990 .

[14]  D. Freedman Statistical models and shoe leather , 1989 .

[15]  Peter Cheeseman,et al.  Fuzzy thinking , 1995 .

[16]  P. Cave,et al.  Fuzzy thinking. , 1998, Journal of advanced nursing.

[17]  N. Cartwright The Dappled World , 1999 .

[18]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Fuzzy-Set Social Science , 2001 .

[19]  David Byrne,et al.  Interpreting Quantitative Data , 2002 .

[20]  A. Ron,et al.  Regression Analysis and the Philosophy of Social Science , 2002 .

[21]  A. George,et al.  Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences , 2005 .

[22]  Barry Cooper,et al.  Applying Ragin's Crisp and Fuzzy Set QCA to Large Datasets: Social Class and Educational Achievement in the National Child Development Study , 2005 .

[23]  William Roberts Clark,et al.  A Simple Multivariate Test for Asymmetric Hypotheses , 2006, Political Analysis.

[24]  Jay Verkuilen,et al.  Fuzzy Set Theory: Applications in the Social Sciences. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences , 2006 .

[25]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage , 2006, Political Analysis.

[26]  Gary Goertz,et al.  A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research , 2006, Political Analysis.

[27]  Gary Goertz,et al.  Assessing the Trivialness, Relevance, and Relative Importance of Necessary or Sufficient Conditions in Social Science , 2006 .

[28]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  The Limitations of Net-Effects Thinking , 2006 .

[29]  Jason Seawright,et al.  Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research , 2008 .

[30]  B. Cooper,et al.  Exploring configurational causation in large datasets with QCA: possibilities and problems , 2008 .

[31]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  Redesigning social inquiry , 2008 .

[32]  J. Mahoney Toward a Unified Theory of Causality , 2008 .

[33]  Judith Glaesser,et al.  How has Educational Expansion Changed the Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Achieving Professional, Managerial and Technical Class Positions in Britain? A Configurational Analysis , 2008 .

[34]  Judith Glaesser,et al.  Just how flexible is the German selective secondary school system? A configurational analysis , 2008 .

[35]  Ray Pawson,et al.  Causality for beginners , 2008 .

[36]  Lieven Verschaffel,et al.  Words and worlds : modelling verbal descriptions of situations , 2009 .

[37]  Barry Cooper,et al.  Realistic Contexts, Mathematics Assessment, and Social Class: Lessons for Assessment Policy from an English Research Programme , 2009 .

[38]  J. Stegenga,et al.  A theory of evidence for evidence-based policy. , 2011 .

[39]  Jason C Theadore When time matters. , 2011, Radiology management.