Systematic Process Analysis: when and how to use it

Challenging the contention that statistical methods applied to large numbers of cases invariably provide better grounds for causal inference, this article explores the value of a method of systematic process analysis that can be applied in a small number of cases. It distinguishes among three modes of explanation – historically specific, multivariate and theory-oriented – and argues that systematic process analysis has special value for developing theory-oriented explanations. It outlines the steps required to perform such analysis well and illustrates them with reference to Owen's investigation of the ‘democratic peace’. Comparing the results available from this kind of method with those from statistical analysis, it examines the conditions under which each method is warranted. Against conceptions of the ‘comparative method’, which imply that small-n case-studies provide weak grounds for causal inference, it argues that the intensive examination of a small number of cases can be an appropriate research design for testing such inferences.

[1]  Fred I. Greenstein,et al.  Handbook of political science , 1975 .

[2]  T. Broadbent,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge , 1972 .

[3]  B. Geddes.  How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics , 1990, Political Analysis.

[4]  Michael W. Doyle,et al.  Liberalism and World Politics , 1986, American Political Science Review.

[5]  A. Moravcsik,et al.  The choice for Europe , 1998 .

[6]  Vaughn R. McKim,et al.  Causality in crisis? : statistical methods and the search for causal knowledge in the social sciences , 1998 .

[7]  Arend Lijphart,et al.  Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method , 1971, American Political Science Review.

[8]  A. Przeworski,et al.  The logic of comparative social inquiry , 1970 .

[9]  R. Bhaskar,et al.  Critical Realism , 2011 .

[10]  Michael W. Doyle,et al.  Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs , 1997 .

[11]  Jon Elster,et al.  Rational Choice History: A Case of Excessive Ambition , 2000, American Political Science Review.

[12]  J. Mahoney.  Strategies of Causal Inference in Small-N Analysis , 2000 .

[13]  Barrington. Moore.  Social origins of dictatorship and democracy , 1966 .

[14]  Trying to Navigate Between Scylla and Charybdis: Misspecified and Unidentified Models in Comparative Politics , 2000 .

[15]  S. Lipset.  Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy , 1959, American Political Science Review.

[16]  T. Kuhn.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago (University of Chicago Press) 1962. , 1962 .

[17]  D. Mitrany.  Methodology of the Social Sciences , 1945, Nature.

[18]  T. Skocpol,et al.  States and social revolutions : a comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China , 1979 .

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

[20]  D. Campbell.  III. “Degrees of Freedom” and the Case Study , 1975 .

[21]  P. Hall.  Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences: ALIGNING ONTOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY IN COMPARATIVE POLITICS , 2003 .

[22]  H. Becker.  Cases, Causes. Conjunctures. Stories and Imagery , 2009 .

[23]  F. Adler.  A Case , 1863, The Lancet.

[24]  J. Mahoney.  Path dependence in historical sociology , 2000 .

[25]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[26]  Geddes Barbara.  HOW THE CASES YOU CHOOSE AFFECT THE ANSWERS YOU GET , 1990 .

[27]  Charles Taylor,et al.  Interpretation and the sciences of man , 1973 .

[28]  John D. Stephens,et al.  Capitalist Development and Democracy. , 1992 .

[29]  I. Lakatos,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1970 .

[30]  Uskali Mäki.  The Methodology of Positive Economics , 2009 .

[31]  Graham Bell,et al.  A Comparative Method , 1989, The American Naturalist.

[32]  T. Skocpol,et al.  States and Social Revolutions , 1979 .

[33]  James Mahoney,et al.  Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Research , 2003 .

[34]  M. Friedman,et al.  The Methodology of Positive Economics , 2010 .

[35]  S. Nilson.  On the logic of historical explanation , 2008 .

[36]  John M. Owen.  How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace , 1994 .

[37]  L. Stone.  The causes of the English Revolution 1529-1642 , 1972 .

[38]  I. Lakatos.  Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1976 .

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

[40]  P. Pierson.  Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics , 2000, American Political Science Review.

[41]  A. Macewan.  Transitions from Authoritarian Rule , 1988 .

[42]  D. Collier.  The Comparative Method: Two Decades of Change , 1991 .