Intermediate-N Comparison: Configurational Comparative Methods

Abstract

Configurational Comparative Methods (CCMs), also called ‘set-theoretic’ methods, is a broad and encompassing label that embraces crisp-set and fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as well as some alternative techniques. All CCM-related techniques conceive cases as configurations of attributes and are geared towards systematic cross-case analysis. QCA represents both a distinctive research approach, with its own aims and set of assumptions, and an umbrella term for specific techniques such as fuzzy-set QCA (fsQCA), which will be the focus of this chapter (Ragin, 2000, 2008a; Rihoux and Ragin, 2009; Schneider and Wagemann, 2012; Thiem and Dusa, 2013). In Ragin’s seminal book (1987), the CCM approach was launched by the development of a new technique in which investigation was based on grouping dichotomous cases, crisp-set QCA (csQCA). It was later developed into fsQCA and other related techniques. The comparative essence of QCA stems from the fact that it was initially geared towards the analysis of multiple cases in a small- and intermediate-N research design (Marx et al., 2013). Ragin’s motivation (1987, 1997) was to develop a ‘synthetic strategy’ as a middle way between the case-oriented (or ‘qualitative’) and the variable-oriented (or ‘quantitative’) approaches. According to Ragin, this middle way would ‘integrate the best features of the case-oriented approach with the best features of the variable-oriented approach’ (Ragin, 1987: p. 84).KeywordsTruth TableQualitative Comparative AnalysisCausal PathPermissive RegulationMembership ScoreThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.