Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-26208| Publication type: | Article in scientific journal |
| Type of review: | Peer review (publication) |
| Title: | Approaches to qualitative comparative analysis and good practices : a systematic review |
| Authors: | Thomann, Eva Ege, Jörn Paustyan, Ekaterina |
| et. al: | No |
| DOI: | 10.1111/spsr.12503 10.21256/zhaw-26208 |
| Published in: | Swiss Political Science Review |
| Volume(Issue): | 28 |
| Issue: | 3 |
| Page(s): | 557 |
| Pages to: | 580 |
| Issue Date: | 2022 |
| Publisher / Ed. Institution: | Wiley |
| ISSN: | 1424-7755 1662-6370 |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | Good practice; Qualitative comparative analysis; Research design; Set-theoretic method |
| Subject (DDC): | 300: Social sciences |
| Abstract: | The Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) methodology has evolved remarkably in social science research. Simultaneously, the use of QCA too often lags behind methodological recommendations of good practice. Improper use is a serious obstacle for QCA to enrich the social science -methodology toolkit. We explore whether the coherence of analytic approaches can help us understand good practices in applied QCA by performing a systematic review of 86 QCA studies. Although adherence to technical GPs has improved over time, we find a high prevalence of incoherent, “hybrid” approaches. As the hybridity of a study increases, its adherence to good practices decreases. The case-oriented, realist, exploratory QCA studies do not consistently follow recommendations of good practice. Instead, the only consistently good-practice approach is case-oriented, realist, but explicitly theory-evaluating. We conclude that consistently aligning methodological choice with the underlying analytic approach and the use of theory can help foster good practices in applied QCA. |
| URI: | https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/26208 |
| Fulltext version: | Published version |
| License (according to publishing contract): | CC BY 4.0: Attribution 4.0 International |
| Departement: | School of Management and Law |
| Organisational Unit: | Institute of Public Management (IVM) |
| Appears in collections: | Publikationen School of Management and Law |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022_Thomann-etal_Approaches-to-qualitative -cmparative-analysis-and-good-practices.pdf | 1.37 MB | Adobe PDF |  View/Open |
Show full item record
Thomann, E., Ege, J., & Paustyan, E. (2022). Approaches to qualitative comparative analysis and good practices : a systematic review. Swiss Political Science Review, 28(3), 557–580. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12503
Thomann, E., Ege, J. and Paustyan, E. (2022) ‘Approaches to qualitative comparative analysis and good practices : a systematic review’, Swiss Political Science Review, 28(3), pp. 557–580. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12503.
E. Thomann, J. Ege, and E. Paustyan, “Approaches to qualitative comparative analysis and good practices : a systematic review,” Swiss Political Science Review, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 557–580, 2022, doi: 10.1111/spsr.12503.
THOMANN, Eva, Jörn EGE und Ekaterina PAUSTYAN, 2022. Approaches to qualitative comparative analysis and good practices : a systematic review. Swiss Political Science Review. 2022. Bd. 28, Nr. 3, S. 557–580. DOI 10.1111/spsr.12503
Thomann, Eva, Jörn Ege, and Ekaterina Paustyan. 2022. “Approaches to Qualitative Comparative Analysis and Good Practices : A Systematic Review.” Swiss Political Science Review 28 (3): 557–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12503.
Thomann, Eva, et al. “Approaches to Qualitative Comparative Analysis and Good Practices : A Systematic Review.” Swiss Political Science Review, vol. 28, no. 3, 2022, pp. 557–80, https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12503.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.