IPSA 2014 Panels
Combining Qualitative Comparative Analysis and Case Studies in Mixed-Methods Designs
In recent years, set-theoretic methods – with Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in its different variants leading the way – have become increasingly popular within the scientific community. At the same time, we witness major innovations and diversifications in the field of case study techniques. In Gary Goertz’ and James Mahoney’s view, both set-theoretic approaches and case study designs are the cornerstones of an empirically orientated qualitative culture in the social sciences. Actually, they do have much in common. Epistemologically, they are grounded in causal complexity, meaning conjunctural, asymmetric and equifinal causation. In their application, both techniques can be fruitfully combined: extensive case knowledge from within-case studies is fundamental to a QCA; by the same token, a QCA can be a starting point for a well-thought selection of cases for further within or cross-case analyses based on comparative, congruence, or process tracing methods.
For the proposed panel, we invite theoretical proposals that address potential benefits and problems of combining case studies and set-theoretic methods in mixed-methods designs in a way mentioned above.
Chair
Markus Siewert
Panelists and papers
Fuzzy-Set Case Studies in QCA-Based MMR: Towards a More Complete Integration – Mr. Kim Sass Mikkelsen
Qualitative Comparative Analysis and Participation Research: Applying QCA to existing small-N comparisons – Mr. Matthew Ryan
The Narrative of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences – Prof. Jorge Mena
Up to the Challenge? The Electoral Performance of Newly Governing Parties After their First Period in Power – Dr. Stijn van Kessel
Experiments in Measuring Public Opinion on Immigration
The measurement of public attitudes to immigrants has been relied upon by politicians to create new policies on immigration control, but also immigrant integration. Yet, there is very little discussion on how these attitudes can be measured and what impact the issues of measurement may have on the results- and subsequently policy making. Most of the surveys on opposition to immigration and prejudices towards immigrants are sensitive to context, timing, question wording and order, political salience of the issue, social norms about expressing prejudice and other measurement problems. Measurement of attitudes towards established migrant-origin residents is especially fraught with social desirability issues, but also multi-dimensional and dynamic perceptions of what constitutes a well integrated migrant, deserving migrant and welcome migrant. These problems have sparked a new interest in using survey-based experiments, which can help overcome some of these issues, but also capture the complex and entwined nature of these attitudes. Papers included in this panel will showcase new survey experiments on this issue in many countries and contexts, and the application of experimental methods to different research questions surrounding immigration and immigrants. A common theme throughout is the production of top quality evidence to inform the heated public debate on immigration and immigrant integration, and the ways in which experimental design can help us to achieve this goal.
Chair
Dr. Laurence Lessard-Phillips
Panelists and papers
Maps and "Pictures in Our Heads": The Effects of Perceptions of Communities on Immigration Attitudes – Prof. Cara Wong, Jake Bowers
Similar Others? Self-Interest vs. Symbolic Attitudes towards Immigration among Dutch Immigrants – Dr. Yphtach Lelkes
Status Quo Anchoring Effects on Immigration Policy attitudes in the United States – Dr. Matthew Wright
The Myth of Integration? Acculturation and the Public View of Immigrant Integration – Dr. Maria Sobolewska, Dr. Silvia Galandini
Where You Come from, What You Know and Why You Come: Disaggregating the Effects of Region of Origin, Migrant Characteristics and Migration Type on British Reactions to Immigrants – Dr. Robert Ford
Discussant
Dr. Robert Ford
Issues in Measurement and Concept Formation
Chair
Dr. Lea Sgier
Panelists and papers
Concepts as Depth Probes, Concepts as Inquiry Blockers – Prof. Fred Eidlin
Extracting Meaning from Statistical Surveys – Dr. Simeon Mitropolitski
Interpretive "Truths"? Validity in Interpretive Qualitative Research – Dr. Lea Sgier
Discussants
Dr. Lea Sgier
Dr. Simeon Mitropolitski
Morphology of Governance
The panel is meant to face two major methodological challenges. The first one is to introduce the principles of morphological analysis into the domain of political studies. The second one is to apply the criteria and language of morphology to comparative study of governance forms in political history and contemporary politics. Morphology (i.e. the study of patterns) is not limited to particular disciplines having specific objects of research. It develops within those disciplines. As a result there are well developed linguistic, cultural, and various other morphologies. They focus on origins, dissemination, transfer and adaptation of whatever patterns to changing environments over the course of time. Analyses of such processes and of their structural outcomes use concepts like homology, or analogy, along with the languages of social reality construction and memetics. Systematic application of such concepts in political research is extremely promising. The panel addresses generic and family resemblances between governance types, convergence / divergence of new and old patterns of governance - empires, states, corporations, consociations, hierarchies and networks. Methodological papers are most welcome. Still it is possible to submit descriptive, empirical or theoretical papers as long as they demonstrate possible uses of methods and concepts of morphology in political studies. We particularly welcome attempts to extend methodological horizons beyond historical institutionalism.
Chair
Prof. Werner J. Patzelt
Panelists and papers
Constitutional (Re)Establishment of Morphological Patterns of Governance: The Role of International Context – Prof. Mikhail Mironyuk, Prof. Mikhail Ilyin
Elements of a Conceptual Framework For Political Meme Analysis – Mr. Ivan Fomin
How to Reform Governmental Institutions? Insights from Morphology and Evolutionary Institutionalism – Prof. Werner J. Patzelt
Morphology of Patrimonial Governance – Prof. Mikhail Ilyin
On the Structure of the Present-day Convergence – Prof. Andrey Korotayev
 back |
top