case selection and the comparative method: introducing the case selector
- Published: 14 August 2017
- Volume 17 , pages 422–436, ( 2018 )
Cite this article
- timothy prescott 1 &
- brian r. urlacher 1
678 Accesses
4 Citations
5 Altmetric
Explore all metrics
We introduce a web application, the Case Selector ( http://und.edu/faculty/brian.urlacher ), that facilitates comparative case study research designs by creating an exhaustive comparison of cases from a dataset on the dependent, independent, and control variables specified by the user. This application was created to aid in systematic and transparent case selection so that researchers can better address the charge that cases are ‘cherry picked.’ An examination of case selection in a prominent study of rebel behaviour in civil war is then used to illustrate different applications of the Case Selector.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this article
Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Rent this article via DeepDyve
Institutional subscriptions
Similar content being viewed by others
Case Study Research
Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Ahmed, A. and Sil, R. (2012) ‘When Multi-method Research Subverts Methodological Pluralism—or, Why We Still Need Single-Method Research’, Perspectives on Politics 10(4): 935–953.
Article Google Scholar
Asher, H. (2016) Polling and the Public: What every citizen should know , Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Google Scholar
Balcells, L. (2010) ‘Rivalry and Revenge: Violence Against Civilians in Conventional Civil Wars’, International Studies Quarterly 54(2): 291–313.
Brady, H. E. and Collier, D. (eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards , Lanhan, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Dafoe, A. and Kelsey, N. (2014) ‘Observing the capitalist peace: Examining market-mediated signaling and other mechanisms’, Journal of Peace Research 51(5): 619–633.
DeRouen Jr, K., Ferguson, M. J., Norton, S., Park, Y. H., Lea, J., and Streat-Bartlett, A. (2010) ‘Civil War Peace Agreement Implementation and State Capacity’, Journal of Peace Research 47(3): 333–346.
Dogan, M. (2009) ‘Strategies in Comparative Sociology’, New Frontiers in Comparative Sociology , Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, pp. 13–44.
Durkheim, E. (1982) [1895] The Rules of Sociological Method , New York, NY: Free Press.
Book Google Scholar
Eck, K and Hultman, L. (2007) ‘One-Sided Violence Against Civilians in War: Insights from New Fatality Data’, Journal of Peace Research 44(2): 233–246.
Fearon, J. D. and Laitin, D. D. (2008) ‘Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods’, The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology , New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 756–776.
Freedman, D. A. (2008) ‘Do the Ns Justify the Means?’, Qualitative & Multi - Method Research 6(2): 4–6.
George, A. L. and Bennett, A. (2004) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences , Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Gerring, J. and Cojocaru, L. (2016) ‘Selecting Cases for Intensive Analysis: A Diversity of Goals and Methods’, Sociological Methods & Research 45(3): 392–423.
Gerring, J. (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework, Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press.
Gerring, J. (2004) ‘What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?’, American Political Science Review 98(2): 341–354.
Gerring, J. (2007) Case Study Research: Principles and Practices , Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Glynn, A. N., and Ichino, N. (2016) ‘Increasing Inferential Leverage in the Comparative Method Placebo Tests in Small-n Research’, Sociological Methods & Research 45(3): 598–629.
Iacus, S. M., King, G., Porro, G., and Katz, J. N. (2012) ‘Causal Inference Without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching’, Political Analysis 20(1): 1–24.
Kohli, A., Evans, P., Katzenstein, P. J., Przeworski, A., Rudolph, S. H., Scott, J. C., and Skocpol, T. (1995) ‘The Role of Theory in Comparative Politics: A Symposium’, World Politics 48(1), 1–49.
Kalyvas, S. N. 2006. The Logic of Violence in Civil War , Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
King, G., Keohane, R. O., and Verba, S. (1994) Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kuperman, A. J. (2004) ‘Is Partition Really the Only Hope? Reconciling Contradictory Findings About Ethnic Civil Wars’, Security Studies 13(4): 314–349.
Lijphart, A. (1971) ‘Comparative Politics and Comparative Method, American Political Science Review 65(3): 682–698.
Maoz, Z. (2002) ‘Case Study Methodology in International Studies: From Storytelling to Hypothesis Testing’, Evaluating Methodology in International Studies , Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 161–186.
Mahoney, J. (2010) ‘After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research’, World Politics , 62(1): 120–147.
Mill, J. S. (1872) A System of Logic . London, England: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer.
Nielsen, Richard A. 2016. Case Selection via Matching. Sociological Methods & Research 45(3): 569 - 597.
Peters, B. G. (1998) Comparative politics: Theory and methods , Washington Square, NY: New York University Press.
Przeworski, A. and Teune, H. (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry , New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
Ragin, C. C. (2014) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies . Berkley, CA: University of California Press.
Ragin, C. C., Berg-Schlosser, D., and de Meur, G. (1996) ‘Political Methodology: Qualitative Methods’, A New Handbook of Political Science , New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 749–769.
Sambanis, N. (2004a) ‘What is Civil War? Conceptual and Empirical Complexities of an Operational Definition’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 48(6): 814–858.
Sambanis, N. (2004b) ‘Using Case Studies to Expand Economic Models of Civil War’, Perspectives on Politics 2(2): 259–279.
Seawright, J. and Gerring, J. (2008) ‘Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options’, Political Research Quarterly 61(2): 294–308.
Schrodt, P. A. (2014) ‘Seven Deadly Sins of Contemporary Quantitative Political Analysis’, Journal of Peace Research 51(2): 287–300.
Slater, D. and Ziblatt, D. (2013) ‘The Enduring Indispensability of the Controlled Comparison’, Comparative Political Studies 46(10): 1301–1327.
Snyder, R. (2001) ‘Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method’, Studies in Comparative International Development 36(1): 93–110.
Tarrow, S. (2010) ‘The Strategy of Paired Comparison: Toward a Theory of Practice’, Comparative Political Studies 43(2): 230–259.
Weinstein, J. M. (2007) Inside Rebellion: The Politics of Insurgent Violence , Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wood, R. M. (2010) ‘Rebel Capability and Strategic Violence Against Civilians’, Journal of Peace Research 47(5): 601–614.
Yang, Z., Matsumura, Y. Kuwata, S., Kusuoka, H., and Takeda, H. (2003) ‘Similar Case Retrieval from the Database of Laboratory Test Results’, Journal of Medical Systems 27(3): 271–281.
Yin, R. K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Method , Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Download references
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and feedback over the course of the review processes. This project has been significantly improved by their suggestions. The authors have also agreed to provide access to the Case Selector through their faculty webpages at their affiliated institutions.
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Political Science Department, University of North Dakota, 293 Centennial Drive, Grand Forks, ND, USA
timothy prescott & brian r. urlacher
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to brian r. urlacher .
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
About this article
prescott, t., urlacher, b.r. case selection and the comparative method: introducing the case selector. Eur Polit Sci 17 , 422–436 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-017-0128-5
Download citation
Published : 14 August 2017
Issue Date : September 2018
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-017-0128-5
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- comparative method
- case selection
- qualitative methods
- Find a journal
- Publish with us
- Track your research
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Comparative case study research is a rewarding strategy for territorial cohesion research as it can deliver in-depth insights how processes, outcomes or relations are interlinked.
Comparative Case Studies have been suggested as providing effective tools to understanding policy and practice along three different axes of social scientific research, namely horizontal (spaces), vertical (scales), and transversal (time).
Based on a review of EU-funded projects in the field of territorial cohesion, we discuss minimum standards of comparative case study research.
What is a case study and what is it good for? In this article, we argue for a new approach—the comparative case study approach—that attends simultaneously to macro, meso, and micro...
Using a multi-level approach with qualitative and quantitative methods, the project conducted, amongst others, local/regional 18 case studies of lifelong learning policies through a multi-method and multi-level design (see Parreira do Amaral et al., 2020 for more information).
This article seeks to develop the idea of comparative area studies (CAS) as a rubric that maintains the importance of regional knowledge while contributing to general theory building using inductive intra-regional, cross-regional, inter-regional comparison.
The 3 regions are very different in cultural terms (MERCOSUR is dominated by Catholicism only, whereas ASEAN is split between Buddhism, Catholicism and Islam), in political terms (MERCOSUR consists only of presidential democracies, whereas the other 2 regions also include authoritarian or failed states), and in the number of member states (only ...
In this short essay, we introduce a web-based application that can easily identify most and least similar cases from a researcher’s dataset. To highlight the need for this application, we begin by reviewing the challenge of case selection in comparative case study research designs.
Similarities in societal institutions, regime type and nature of nationalist discourse indicate that China and Vietnam are appropriate cases for comparison. Moreover, through discourse analysis, scholars have used these structural characteristics to explain expressions of nationalism in autocracies.