The case survey method and applications in political science

Philosophy of Science, 2012

Political science research, particularly in international relations and comparative politics,has increasingly become dominated by statistical and formal approaches. The promise of these approaches shifted the methodological emphasis away from case study research. In response, supporters of case study research argue that case studies provide evidence for causal claims that is not available through statistical and formal research methods, and many have advocated multimethod research. I propose a way of understanding the integration of multiple methodologies in which the causes sought in case studies are treated as singular causation and contingent on a theoretical framework.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are used to combine results across studies to determine an overall effect. Meta-analysis is especially useful for combining evidence to inform social policy, but meta-analyses of applied social science research may encounter practical issues arising from the nature of the research domain. The current paper identifies potential resolutions to four issues that may be encountered in systematic reviews and meta-analyses in social research. The four issues are: scoping and targeting research questions appropriate for meta-analysis; selecting eligibility criteria where primary studies vary in research design and choice of outcome measures; dealing with inconsistent reporting in primary studies; and identifying sources of heterogeneity with multiple confounded moderators. The paper presents an overview of each issue with a review of potential resolutions, identified from similar issues encountered in meta-analysis in medical and biological sciences. The discussion aims to share and improve methodology in systematic reviews and meta-analysis by promoting cross-disciplinary communication, that is, to encourage 'viewing through different lenses'.

D espite repeated calls for the use of " mixed methods " in comparative analysis, political scientists have few systematic guides for carrying out such work. This paper details a unified approach which joins intensive case-study analysis with statistical analysis. Not only are the advantages of each approach combined, but also there is a synergistic value to the nested research design: for example, statistical analyses can guide case selection for in-depth research, provide direction for more focused case studies and comparisons, and be used to provide additional tests of hypotheses generated from small-N research. Small-N analyses can be used to assess the plausibility of observed statistical relationships between variables, to generate theoretical insights from outlier and other cases, and to develop better measurement strategies. This integrated strategy improves the prospects of making valid causal inferences in cross-national and other forms of comparative research by drawing on the distinct strengths of two important approaches.

Quality & Quantity

It is widely accepted that an appropriate combination of quantitative and qualitative methods provides a better understanding of research problems as opposed to using them separately. This mixed approach is trying to cover any gaps and weaknesses between the quantitative and qualitative research. Furthermore, triangulation is a common way to combine quantitative and qualitative approaches, which has been used in numerous studies in order to detect different aspects of the research question as well as because the deficiencies of one method are often the forces of the other. The use of multiple methods reflects an attempt to understand and study the phenomenon under in depth investigation, while triangulation is not as much a results-validation strategy, but more of an alternative proposal for validation, through which the breadth, depth and consistency of the methodological processes is increased. There are different types of triangulation, but a mainstream process may include but is not limited at: (a) data triangulation, (b) investigator triangulation, and (c) methodological triangulation, in the version of triangulation of methods belonging to different paradigms. This paper will study and analyze the importance of mixed methods in political science and especially in governance and public policy research by focusing on specific examples of related research and outcomes. The main reason is to assess the importance of mixed methods in achieving better understanding of the social problems and transitions in the post-covid-19 era and thus shed light in contemporary issues related to governance and public policies.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. This content downloaded from 131.

International Negotiation, 2005

No longer on the fringes of research design, meta-analysis has established a methodological foothold in social science research. The use of meta-analysis as a research method to study social conflict, however, remains limited. This article is designed to increase the accessibility of meta-analyses, while identifying issues and controversies. To this end, we offer examples from our own experiences in an overview of the development, choices, and challenges of a meta-analysis, as well as more technical references for further instruction.

Political Psychology, 1999

The case study, as a method of inquiry, is particularly suited to the field of political psychology. Yet there is little training in political science, and even less in psychology, on how to do case study research. Furthermore, misconceptions about case studies contribute to the methodological barrier that exists within and between the two parent disciplines. This paper reviews the various definitions and uses of case studies and integrates a number of recent insights and advances into a practical guide for conducting case study research. To this end, the paper discusses various stereotypes of the case study and offers specific steps aimed at addressing these criticisms.

KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie

This paper synthesizes methodological knowledge derived from comparative survey research and comparative politics and aims to enable researches to make prudent research decisions. Starting from the data structure that can occur in international comparisons at different levels, it suggests basic definitions for cases and contexts, i. e. the main ingredients of international comparison. The paper then goes on to discuss the full variety of case selection strategies in order to highlight their relative advantages and disadvantages. Finally, it presents the limitations of internationally comparative social science research. Overall, the paper suggests that comparative research designs must be crafted cautiously, with careful regard to a variety of issues, and emphasizes the idea that there can be no one-fits-all solution.

Sociologija, 2022

A systematic literature review is a desk-based research method that sums up the best available research on a specific question using a rigorous and verifiable methodology. This paper aims to discuss and analyse stages of conducting SLR in the social sciences, from a formulation of a research question, protocol development, literature search, screening, quality assessment, data extraction and synthesis to writing review findings. Research in the social sciences differs from research in biomedicine and the author makes the necessary adjustments to make this method more closely suited to the particularities of the social sciences.

Environmental Science & Policy, 2020

This article provides an overview of how systematic review (SR) methods have been used to evaluate public policy. It argues that these methods can be applied to the evaluation of environmental public policy, but that certain challenges need to be addressed in order to fulfil the SR methods potential. The article reflects upon two methodological challenges confronting systematic reviewers: how data from the articles should be synthesised; and how to take societal contexts into account. Analysing how these challenges have been addressed in practice contributes to the theoretical discussion about the usefulness of different synthesis methods, and the role of context. Three lessons are drawn as to how systematic review methods can become useful when applied to the evaluation of environmental public policy, namely: (1) to anticipate the heterogeneity in the literature from the beginningin terms of both research design and operationalisation of key concepts; (2) to consider the purpose of the review when deciding whether to take a single-or multi-context approach; and (3) to be methodologically innovative when applying the systematic review methods to complex policies.