Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Necessary Conditions, and Limited Diversity

Barry Cooper,Judith Glaesser

doi:10.1177/1525822x15598974

Abstract

We discuss a recent development in the set theoretic analysis of data sets characterized by limited diversity. Ragin, in developing his Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), developed a standard analysis that produces parsimonious, intermediate, and complex Boolean solutions of truth tables. Schneider and Wagemann argue this standard analysis procedure is problematic and develop an enhanced standard analysis (ESA). We show, by developing Schneider and Wagemann’s discussion of Stokke’s work on fisheries conservation and by discussing a second illustrative truth table, that ESA has problematic features. We consider how scholars might proceed in the face of these problems, considering the relations between limited diversity and the different methods of reducing truth tables instantiated in Ragin’s QCA and Baumgartner’s Coincidence Analysis.

Highlights

We discuss problems embedded in Schneider and Wagemann’s (2012, 2013) proposed enhanced standard analysis (ESA) procedure for Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)
If we assume that the given data are complete, these necessity claims can be regarded as secure
Without access to SAs, fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), using QM, cannot find *I to be sufficient for SUCCESS in the Stokke case or B to be sufficient for Y in the invented truth table

Summary

Introduction

We discuss problems embedded in Schneider and Wagemann’s (2012, 2013) proposed enhanced standard analysis (ESA) procedure for Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). To establish the sufficiency of a condition or a combination of conditions for some outcome, QCA assesses whether the set of cases with the condition(s) is a subset of those with the outcome. To establish necessity, it assesses whether the set of cases with the outcome is a subset of those with the condition(s). Whether QCA establishes causal claims or, less ambitiously, provides complex descriptions and/or predictions, continues to be debated (see, e.g., Cooper and Glaesser 2012a).

Objectives

Conclusion