Concepts and Measurement in Multimethod Research

Ahram, Ariel I.

doi:10.1177/1065912911427453

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet, when aggregate indices are used in analysis and where interpretation comes into play, one faces the potential pitfall of conceptual slipping. Ariel Ahram (2013) defines this problem as arising “when different taxonomical schemas are used to organize what purports to be the same concepts” (p. 1), typically as qualitative methods array cases in nominal and ordinal categories while quantitative methods array them along basic interval or ratio scales. Ahram (2013) continues by discussing how this can produce analytical ambiguity in terms of categorizing cases, as well as cause difficulty in generating valid generalizations as, in citing John Gerring, “it violates the core assumption of unit homogeneity and equivalence.” (p. 8)…”

Section: Concept Validity and Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing and Measuring Citizenship and Integration Policy

Goodman

2015

Comparative Political Studies

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on immigration and citizenship has become one of the fastest growing areas in political science, with one trend being the boon of comparative citizenship and immigration policy indices. This article discusses methodological concerns with this enterprise. The first half addresses issues with policy indices, including (a) concept validity and boundary maintenance and (b) measurement, compensability, and aggregate index use. The second half examines why these problems matter in hypothesis testing and for inference by replicating three policy index-using studies, rerunning analyses with different indices to test consistency of findings. These tests underscore a central finding: What scholars know about the effects of immigration and citizenship policy is subject to data and sample selection. The article concludes with a number of recommendations and strategies for moving forward. These approaches will not only strengthen this growing research agenda but also mainstream migrant-related policy studies into larger literatures in comparative politics.

show abstract

Section: Concept Validity and Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing and Measuring Citizenship and Integration Policy

Goodman

2015

Comparative Political Studies

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This makes it difficult to map the lessons of the qualitative and quantitative study of this dyad onto the Ussuri conflict or potential cases, such as confrontations between Iran and Israel or North Korea and the United States, as these would pit newly nuclear states against established nuclear powers. This oversight highlights the importance of ensuring that key variables tested or conditions established with one method are considered when using another method, 12 and that concepts and measures are kept as similar as possible across methods (Ahram, 2009, 2013). Greater attention to these measurement issues would have preserved the internal validity of the cross-case and cross-method comparisons.…”

Section: The Use Of Mixed Methods In Studies Of Violence and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed Methods Research in the Study of Political and Social Violence and Conflict

Thaler

2016

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of political and social violence and conflict has expanded in recent decades, concurrent with a rise in the use of mixed methods research (MMR) throughout the social sciences. This article examines how methods are best integrated in studies of violence and conflict, critically reviewing examples from previous prominent works and suggesting directions for future research. I explore the benefits of MMR for understanding structures, agency, and processes related to violence and conflict, and the opportunity MMR offers to influence a broader academic and policy audience. MMR can improve the accordance of theories and empirical studies with the complexities of social reality and enhance understanding of the causes, consequences, and potential remedies of violence and conflict.Keywords violence, intrastate conflict, interstate conflict, structure, agencyThe study of violence and conflict has been expanding in recent decades at all levels of analysis, from interpersonal violence to interstate warfare, concurrent with increasing methodological development and rising popularity of mixed methods research (MMR) across the social sciences. This article argues that MMR increases our leverage on complex puzzles in the study of violence and conflict and is likely to reward scholars who use this approach with valuable empirical insights that will aid in theory testing and development.I present arguments for the utility of MMR in the study of different types of sociopolitical violence and conflict, and examples and critiques are provided of prominent existing mixed methods violence and conflict research, highlighting important lessons with regard to internal and external validity. I then offer a new typology of the presentation of evidence from different methods in MMR and discuss how MMR can increase the consumption and impact of research by appealing to audiences across methodological persuasions. Directions for future research are examined, such as increased incorporation of experimental evidence, vignettes, and formal models, and I consider potential difficulties in conducting MMR on the sensitive and complex subjects of violence and conflict. As we study the motivations and behaviors of violent individuals, groups, and states, it is beneficial to use all the methods at our disposal to understand violence and conflict and to work toward the normative goal of reducing the incidence of violence,

show abstract

“…We fully share this perspective on MMR, but also contend that the current perspective on the combination of regression analysis and process tracing fails to take some significant issues into account (see also Ahram , Goerres and Prinzen ). In our paper, we address a serious problem related to case selection on the basis of regression results , which is the nexus between the two methods that has received considerable attention in the past (Bennett and Braumoeller , Lieberman , Rohlfing , Seawright and Gerring , Wolf ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 88%

Building on Solid Ground: Robust Case Selection in Multi‐Method Research

Rohlfing

Starke

2013

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social sciences are currently witnessing a trend toward multi-method research (MMR). However, many important issues have not been sufficiently addressed so far. The focus of this paper is case selection for process tracing on the basis of regression results, which is the main point of intersection between the two methods. Based on a review, we first show that the current empirical and methodological literature does not fully appreciate the implications of modeling uncertainty and non-robust quantitative results. The major problem is that non-robust regression results may lead to invalid choices and faulty inferences. We develop a novel selection procedure that takes these issues into account and improves causal inference in MMR.

show abstract

Concepts and Measurement in Multimethod Research

Cited by 15 publications

References 60 publications

Conceptualizing and Measuring Citizenship and Integration Policy

Conceptualizing and Measuring Citizenship and Integration Policy

Mixed Methods Research in the Study of Political and Social Violence and Conflict

Building on Solid Ground: Robust Case Selection in Multi‐Method Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About