Transcript Lecture 3: Design & Logic

北京师范大学
教育研究方法讲座系列
Lecture 3
The Design and Logics of
Comparative-Historical Method in the Social Sciences
The Essentials of Comparative Studies
“We have only one means of demonstrating that one
phenomenon is the cause of another: it is to compare
case to cases where they are simultaneously present or
absent. When the phenomenon can be artificially
produced by the observer, the method is experimentation
in its proper sense. When, on the contrary, the product of
fact is out of reach, when we can thus only bring them
together as they are spontaneously produced, the method
we use is that of indirect experimentation, or
comparative method.” (Durkhiem; Quoted in Dogan and
Pelassy, 1990, P. 15-16)
The Essentials of Comparative Studies
“Comparison is a universal method in the social
sciences; it is worthwhile not only to those who study in
international field. ….It is not surprise that the
historical method is so often combined with
comparative method.” (Dogan and Pelassy, 1990, P. 16)
“Comparative sociology is not a special branch of
sociology, it is sociology itself, in so far as it cease to be
purely descriptive and aspires to account for fact.”
(Durkhiem, P. 157; Quoted in Schriewer, 2003, P. 5)
The Basic Principles of Research Design
of Comparative Research
Morris Zelditch (1971) specifies that the design of
comparative research is conditioned largely by four
rules:
Comparability : Two or more instances of a phenomenon may
be compared if and only if there exists some variable, say V,
common to each instance.
J.S. Mill's 1st Canon (Method of Agreement) : No second
variable, say U, is the cause or effect of V, if it is not found
when V is found.
J.S. Mill's 2nd Canon (Method of Difference): No second
variables U is the cause or effect of V if it is found when V is
not.
The Basic Principles of Research Design
of Comparative Research
Morris Zelditch (1971) specifies that the design of
comparative research is conditioned largely by four rules:
 Rule of One Variable : No second variable U is definitely the
cause or effect of V if there exists a third variable, w, that is
present or absent in the same circumstances as U.
In order to verify that U and V are correlated in the design
where there are other 2 variables, say W and X, we need at
least eight cases (2x2x2) of the following nature
The Basic Principles of Research Design
of Comparative Research
Case
Causes
V W X
Effect
U
Results
(Method of Agreement)
1
2
3
4
1
1
1
1
1 1
1 0
0 1
0 0
1
1
1
1
VWX
VWX
VWX
VWX
U
U
U
U
(Method of Difference)
5
6
7
8
0 0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0
0 1 1
0
0
0
0
VWX
VWX
VWX
VWX
U
U
U
U
Charles Ragin’s Boolean Approach
to Comparative Analysis
Charles Ragin’s Boolean Approach
to Comparative Analysis
The operation of the Boolean Algebra consist of the
following features
 Binary data and truth table
Charles Ragin’s Boolean Approach
to Comparative Analysis
The operation of the Boolean Algebra consist of the
following features
 Binary data and truth table
 Boolean addition and multiplication
Charles Ragin’s Boolean Approach
to Comparative Analysis
The operation of the Boolean Algebra consist of the
following features
 Binary data and truth table
 Boolean addition and multiplication
 Boolean minimization
Charles Ragin’s Boolean Approach
to Comparative Analysis
The operation of the Boolean Algebra consist of the
following features




Binary data and truth table
Boolean addition and multiplication
Boolean minimization
De Morgan’s Law
S=AC+AB+Bc
Charles Ragin’s Boolean Approach
to Comparative Analysis
The operation of the Boolean Algebra consist of the
following features







Binary data and truth table
Boolean addition and multiplication
Boolean minimization
De Morgan’s Law
Identifying prime implicants
Identifying necessary and sufficient causes
Limitations of the Boolean Approach
Objectives of Comparative-Historical
Research in Education & the Social Sciences
 To reveal the contextual and relative nature of social
phenomena: "There is no such a thing as comparative
chemistry or contextual physics. In the natural sciences, the
chain of causality is everywhere identical. In experimental
physics or chemistry discoveries have a universal validity.
On the contrary, the social sciences, because of the diversity
and idiosyncrasy of human societies, are contextual and
relativistic …The best way to comprehend such a biological
and social diversity is the comparative method." (Dogan,
2006, p. 309) Accordingly, we have comparative education,
comparative economics, comparative politics and
comparative sociology.
Objectives of Comparative-Historical
Research in Education & the Social Sciences
 To elevate from ethnocentrism: In order to disenchanted
themselves from the processes of socialization and
acculturation of a particular socio-historical context, into
which all human beings are born; social scientists are
obliged to transcend themselves from the social milieu that
they have got so used to and have taken for granted.
Therefore, "comparison …helps to rid us of inherited
fossilized notions, obliged us to reconsider the validity of
undiscussed interpretations, and enlarge our visual field."
(Dogan and Pelassy, 1984, p. 9) "Comparative studies point
out and denounced ethnocentrism, and in this way they
certainly contribute to its lessening." (p. 13)
Objectives of Comparative-Historical
Research in Education & the Social Sciences
 To construct complex causal explanatory models for big
structures and large processes: Big structures and large
processes found in social phenomena are so complex that
they can never be explained by simple linear cause-effect
models. None can these causal explanations bear the
features of universality and exhaustiveness as those in
natural sciences do. Instead, they are embedded in a
network of causations involving the interactive and/or
circular dynamics between endogenous and exogenous
factors and among economic, political, social and cultural
factors; and the cooperations and/or competitions among
various interesting parties.
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
We may tentatively codify the strategy in comparativehistorical method into three interrelated dialogues
 Dialogue between theory and evidence
 Dialogue between historical studies of particular case and
comparative studies of multiple cases
 Dialogue between functional equivalence and institutional
configuration
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
 Dialogue between theory and evidence
 As Weber indicates (1949), researchers of historical and
social phenomena are confronted with infinite reality, as
result researchers have to equip their finite minds with
ideal-typical concepts and theories and strive to
"mediate" the multiplicity of evidences generated from
the infinite reality with their ideal-typical concepts and
theoretical constructs. Therefore, one of the procedures
of comparative-historical method is to engage in repeated
and intensive dialogue between theory and evidences.
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
Dialogue between theory and evidence: ….
 Mattei Dogan and Dominique Pelassy (1990) have further
specified these mediating conceptual devices into
•
Operational concepts: “The concept is an abstract idea in that it
considers only certain characteristics of the objects; and it is a
general idea, in that it extends the considered characteristic to all
objects of the same class.” (Dogan and Pelassy, 1990, P. 24; original
emphases) Hence, Dogan and Pelassy underlines that “there is an
unending dialectic between a priori and a posteriori”, (ibid) i.e.
between abstract and concrete or between concept and fact. As this
unending dialectic is “applied to comparative analysis, the point could
be briefly stated as following: Without abstraction and intellectual
construction, there are no common denominators between the several
objects submitted to comparison. Because the concept is this very
abstraction. There can be no comparisons without concepts.” (ibid)
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
Dialogue between theory and evidence: ….
 Mattei Dogan and Dominique Pelassy (1990) have further
specified these mediating conceptual devices into …
• Theoretical framework: “Concepts are indispensable but not
sufficient for the comparativists, who must not only analyze and
dissect reality but also coherently structure data. It is the creation of
logical frameworks that the comparativist can make knowledge
cumulative.” (Dogan and Pelassy, 1990, P. 32) Dogan and Pelassy
further suggest that “For the comparativist, undoubtedly,
functionalism is the most useful of all theoretical frameworks. By
liberating comparative analysis from its formal shackles, it permits
progress that remains above criticism.” (P. 35)
• Functional equivalences: ….(To be expounded in details in
subsequent lectures
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
Dialogue between theory and evidence: ….
 As Mahoney and Rueschemeyer specify "most comparative
historical work aims for explanations of important outcomes
within delimited historical contexts, usually focusing on a small
number of cases. While this approach does not directly aim for
universally applicable knowledge, it represents a bargain in which
significant advantages are gained. Above all, the approach makes
possible a dialogue between theory and evidence of an intensity
that is rare in quantities social research. By employing a small
number of cases, comparative-historical researchers can move
comfortably back and forth between theory and history in many
iterations of analysis as they formulate new concepts, discover
novel explanations, and refine preexisting theoretical expectations
in light of detailed case evidence." (2003, P.13)
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
Dialogue between historical studies of particular case and
comparative studies of multiple cases
Jurgen Schriewer specifies that comparative-historical research “aims at
the ‘reconciliation of history and comparison’. …This reconciliation is not
merely the merging of cross-cultural comparison and historical process
analysis into comparative-historical research. It also implies an approach
which transmutes comparison’s explanatory claims into the conceptually
informed reconstruction of the developmental path taken by distinct
sociocultural configuration.” (Schriewer, 2003, P. 33) More specifically,
comparative-historical research strives to bridge two research emphases,
namely, one the one hand, the emphasis of comparative research in the
social sciences, which focuses on building generalized explanatory models
across different countries on their paths of economic growth, political
development, and modernization in general; and one the other hand, the
emphasis of historical research, which strive to reveal rich and thick
historical evidence to account for particular event and/or process.
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
Dialogue between historical studies of particular case
and comparative studies of multiple cases
 Dialogue between historical research and comparative research in
the social sciences can therefore be conceived as the process of
build on an accumulative spiral of knowledge on big structure and
huge process. That is, by undertaking historical studies on
particular cases and comparative studies across cases alternatively,
we may gain particular insights into the developmental process of
each case. These sights will in turn help us to conduct comparative
studies across cases and generate knowledge of higher degree of
universality. Again, these universal knowledge will inform
researcher to explore new sights into the developmental path of
particular case. …
Strategies in
Comparative-Historical Research
 Dialogue between functional equivalence and
institutional configuration: …(To be explicated in
subsequent lecture)
Theory
Comparative Studies
of Multiple Cases
Evidence
Historical Studies
of Particular Case
Functional
Equivalence
Structural
Configuration
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
Double traps and dilemma of comparative-historical
research: Charles Tilly, one of the most prominent
historical and comparative sociologists of the field (19292008), concludes his work Big Structures, Large
processes, Huge Comparison under the heading of “the
tasks at hand” by highlighting two traps confronting
comparative-historical researchers.
“Therein lie two traps: the trap of refinement and the
trap of despair.
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
…“Therein lie two traps: the trap of refinement and the
trap of despair.
 It is tempting to look for finer and finer comparisons, with
larger numbers of cases and more variables controlled. In the
present state of our knowledge of the big structures and large
processes, that would be a serious error. It would be an error
because with the multiplication of cases and the
standardization of categories for comparison the theoretical
return declines more rapidly than the empirical return rises.
…In a distant future, we can aim to have theories of largescale social processes sufficiently precise that a well-measured
chunk of a single region’s experience will provide strong
proof of a theory’s validity or invalidity.
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
…“Therein lie two traps: the trap of refinement and the
trap of despair. …
“The trap of despair opens up when we decide that such a day
will never come ― can never come.” (Tilly, 1984, P. 144)
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
The value and significance of comparative-historical
research: Entangled within these two traps, Tilly raises
the question: What is the use of such a research method.
Simultaneously he answer the question as follow,
“The use is this: Historical grounded huge comparisons of big
structures and large processes help establish what must be
explained, attach the possible explanations to their context in
time and space, and sometime actually improve our
understanding of those structures and processes.” (Tilly, 1984,
145))
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
The value and significance of comparative-historical
research: …
 The relative value of comparative-historical method; or more
specifically, the four types of comparisons categorized by
Tilly, namely individualizing, universalizing, encompassing
and variation-finding comparisons; mainly “depends on the
intellectual task at hand.” (Tilly, 1984, P. 145)
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
The value and significance of comparative-historical
research: …
 The relative values…“depends on the intellectual task at
hand.” (Tilly, 1984, P. 145)
 Pragmatically, the significance of different types of comparisons
depends on the nature of the issue that the researcher is to address. If
the research question at hand is a particularistic issue on a specific
socio-historical even or process at a definite point in time, method of
individualizing comparison will be relevant to the task. On the other
hand, if the research question at hand involves diverse and numerous
units in various localities and across long period of time, the method
qualifies for the task will either be the universalizing comparison or
encompassing comparison. (Tilly, 1984, Pp. 145-46)
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
The value and significance of comparative-historical
research: …
 The relative values…“depends on the intellectual task at
hand.” (Tilly, 1984, P. 145)
 Ontologically, the value of comparative-historical research also
depends on the nature and features of the phenomenon confronting
us. It all depends on whether we oriented to the world view that the
world (with its fundamental units of sovereign states or coherent
sociocultural communities) we are living is converging into a relatively
similar “world system” or “global village” or on the contrary that the
world is diverging further into isolated fragments of no connection.
(Tilly, 1984, P. 146-47)
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
The value and significance of comparative-historical
research: …
 The relative values…“depends on the intellectual task at
hand.” (Tilly, 1984, P. 145)
 Epistemologically, the significance of comparative-historical research
finally rests on the research interest of the researchers themselves. If
one is interest in revelation of idiosyncratic features and meanings of
a specific social aggregate in a particular location and specific point in
time, it will be advisable that one should migrate to other research
paradigms such as interpretive-ethnographic studies or behavioristicpsycho-metric studies. On the other hand, if one ahs decided to elevate
one’ understanding from marcohistorical to either world-system or
world-history level, it will then be advisable that one must strive hard
to master one’ craft within the big structures, large processes, and
huge comparisons. (Tilly, 1984, P. 147)
The Tasks at Hand: The Significance and
Prospect of Comparative-Historical Research
Heuristic device of enquiry:
More recently Charles Tilly concludes the state of the art
of comparative-historical research tools as “a fine
heuristic but a logically and ontological flawed basis for
serious explanation of social process. …The lining up of
civilizations, societies, cultures, wars, revolutions, and
other great chunks of social experience for arguments
about causes and meanings will persist as the heuristic
and literary trope it has been for hundred of years, but
will shrivel as a method of systematic analysis." (Tilly,
2006, 225-226)
Lecture 3
The Design and Logics of
Comparative-Historical Method in the Social Sciences
END
Basic Logics of Research Design
for Causal Explanation
Three principles of research design of causal
explanatory study
 Definite association between two instances of a phenomenon
(say U and V are highly correlated)
 The permanent temporal order between the two instances (say
U always precede V in all phenomena)
 Ceteris paribus (all other things being equal or constant)
Basic Logics of Research Design
for Causal Explanation
Three strategies of research design
 Treatment
 Control
 Randomization
Random
Assignment
of Group
Membership
Pre-test
Treatment
Post-test
Treatment
Group
√
√
√
Control
Group
√
×
√