Assessing Set-Theoretic Comparative Methods: A Tool for Qualitative Comparativists?

In: Comparative political studies: CPS, Band 49, Heft 6, S. 775-780

Abstract

Set-theoretic comparative methods (STCM) have some appeal, but these methods as well as claims about these methods are deeply problematic. The most basic problem is that these methods reduce causation to a logical relation and erroneously posit that causal hypotheses can be formalized as a relation of material implication. In addition, advocated of STCM commonly misrepresent their relationship to quantitative and qualitative methods. STCM and standard regression analysis are not incommensurable methods. Moreover, STCM actually clash with process tracing, a method used by qualitative researchers. Thus, qualitative comparativists should not use STCM, and the discussion about social science methods should turn from STCM to other, more promising options.