Abstract
Abstract This article indicates that comparative historical analysis is complementary to statistical analysis because it deals with ‘causes of effects’ rather than ‘effects of causes’. It also presents some ideas about how one can tackle the problems posed by engaging in comparative historical inquiry. In addition, the article argues that comparative-historical analysis and statistical analysis pursue different research goals, and that while they both face methodological challenges, they both play an essential role in generating knowledge in political science. Comparative-historical studies that use regression analysis in the course of process tracing are not necessarily more powerful than comparative-historical studies that do not use any statistical testing. There is nothing inherently wrong with conducting comparative-historical work that does not include a statistical component (and vice versa).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
