A Unifying Framework for Causal Analysis in Set-Theoretic Multimethod Research

Rohlfing, Ingo; Schneider, Carsten Q.

doi:10.1177/0049124115626170

Cited by 67 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But if epistemic communities can be influential even in routine policymaking, as evidenced by the Polish HTA case, then a reformulation of uncertainty as a more general concept is in order. This is exposed, in line with methodological expectations (Beach & Pedersen, 2016; Rohlfing & Schneider, ), by the deviant Czech case. Using a broader concept—namely decision makers' demand for epistemic communities' input—we can shed light on how this revised scope condition influences the causal mechanism.…”

Section: Health Technology Assessment Agencies: Comparing the Polish supporting

confidence: 82%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When Epistemic Communities Fail: Exploring the Mechanism of Policy Influence

Löblová¹

2017

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epistemic communities are an established concept in the study of international relations but can also explain policy change at the domestic level. This article asks why some epistemic communities manage to convince decision makers of their preferred policies while others do not. It suggests that the reason lies in the causal mechanism of epistemic communities' influence on decision makers, mediated by decision makers' demand for expert input. Most epistemic communities scholarship focuses on single case studies where the communities' influence on policy was strong and clear, leading to an overestimation of the groups' influence. To help correct this probable bias, this article compares a successful case of epistemic community influence (health technology assessment in Poland) with an unsuccessful example of the same policy (in the Czech Republic). The juxtaposition allows for unpacking of the necessary parts of the causal mechanism (emergence of an epistemic community, its activity, access to decision makers, and successful suasion) and separating them from the crucial scope condition. Decision makers' uncertainty about the policy issue at hand has traditionally been the key scope condition for epistemic communities but the successful Polish case demonstrates that epistemic communities can be influential even in highly certain areas of routine policymaking, leading to a reconceptualization of uncertainty as policymakers' demand for expert input. Demand can originate from various sources, but any change of it affects individual parts of the causal mechanism, leading to a success or failure of epistemic communities' policy enterprise.

show abstract

Section: Health Technology Assessment Agencies: Comparing the Polish supporting

confidence: 82%

“… The Czech Republic is a negative case in terms of outcome (HTA agency established, or not), but a deviant case in terms of causal mechanism: the mechanism and main theory‐based scope conditions are both present in the Czech Republic, but the outcome is absent (see Beach & Pedersen, 2016; Rohlfing & Schneider, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

When Epistemic Communities Fail: Exploring the Mechanism of Policy Influence

Löblová¹

2017

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These crucial research steps, however, fall outside of the definitional scope of set-theoretic MMR. 1 In the following, we limit our discussion to set-theoretic MMR after a cross-case analysis of sufficiency, as discussed in Rohlfing (2013, 2016), Schneider and Rohlfing (manuscript), and Rohlfing and Schneider (2018). 2 We first briefly summarize the different types of cases and the purpose of their within-case analysis (Section 2.3.1).…”

Section: Set-theoretic Multi-methods Research (Mmr)mentioning

confidence: 99%

SetMethods: an Add-on R Package for Advanced QCA

Oană¹,

Schneider²

2018

The R Journal

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents the functionalities of the R package SetMethods, aimed at performing advanced set-theoretic analyses. This includes functions for performing set-theoretic multi-method research, set-theoretic theory evaluation, Enhanced Standard Analysis, diagnosing the impact of temporal, spatial, or substantive clusterings of the data on the results obtained via Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), indirect calibration, and visualising QCA results via XY plots or radar charts. Each functionality is presented in turn, the conceptual idea and the logic behind the procedure being first summarized, and afterwards illustrated with data from Schneider et al. (2010).# We load the SetMethods package:

show abstract

“…This combination of QCA and case studies has been labeled set‐theoretic multimethod research (Goertz and Mahoney : chap. 1; Rohlfing and Schneider ). SMMR capitalizes on the fact that QCA and case studies can be anchored in set theory (Goertz and Mahoney : chap.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SMMR capitalizes on the fact that QCA and case studies can be anchored in set theory (Goertz and Mahoney : chap. 1; Rohlfing and Schneider ). The existing work on SMMR offers a set of guidelines that allow empirical researchers to perform an integrated analysis of a truth table and of individual cases via process tracing (see below).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Set‐theoretic Multimethod Research: The Role of Test Corridors and Conjunctions for Case Selection

Schneider

Rohlfing

2019

Swiss Political Sci Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Set‐theoretic multimethod research (SMMR) using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) formalizes the choice of cases based on a truth table analysis. We make three recommendations for improving SMMR. First, current standards can lead to faulty case selection if causal inference on a conjunction is the goal. Case selection needs to take into account that the non‐members of a conjunction might be empirically diverse and that only selected types of non‐members are ideal for causal inference. Second, we formally show that cases with similar fuzzy‐set memberships in a term and the outcome are the superior choice for process tracing. They minimize the expected membership in the mechanism and make it most difficult to pass a hypothesis test. Third, we propose formulas that comply with all SMMR principles and identify the best pairs of cases for analysis. We illustrate our arguments with a study of the effectiveness of sanctions against authoritarian regimes.

show abstract

A Unifying Framework for Causal Analysis in Set-Theoretic Multimethod Research

Cited by 67 publications

References 79 publications

When Epistemic Communities Fail: Exploring the Mechanism of Policy Influence

When Epistemic Communities Fail: Exploring the Mechanism of Policy Influence

SetMethods: an Add-on R Package for Advanced QCA

Set‐theoretic Multimethod Research: The Role of Test Corridors and Conjunctions for Case Selection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About