Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-hpxsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T15:41:25.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conceptual “Stretching” Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

David Collier  and
James E. Mahon Jr.
David Collier
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
James E. Mahon Jr.
Affiliation:
Williams College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When scholars extend their models and hypotheses to encompass additional cases, they commonly need to adapt their analytic categories to fit the new contexts. Giovanni Sartori's work on conceptual “traveling” and conceptual “stretching” provides helpful guidance in addressing this fundamental task of comparative analysis. Yet Sartori's framework draws upon what may be called classical categorization, which views the relation among categories in terms of a taxonomic hierarchy, with each category having clear boundaries and defining properties shared by all members. We examine the challenge to this framework presented by two types of nonclassical categories: family resemblances and radial categories. With such categories, the overly strict application of a classical framework can lead to abandoning to category prematurely or to modifying it inappropriately. We discuss solutions to these problems, using examples of how scholars have adapted their categories in comparative research on democracy and authoritarianism.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 87 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 845 - 855
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, Charles W. 1970. The Political Economy of Modern Spain: Policy-Making in an Authoritarian System. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Angeles, Peter A. 1981. Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Barnes & Noble.Google Scholar
Bealer, George. 1987. “The Boundary between Philosophy and Cognitive Science.” Journal of Philosophy 74:553–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendix, Reinhard. 1956. Work and Authority in Industry: Ideologies of Management in the Course of Industrialization. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bendix, Reinhard. 1964. Nation-building and Citizenship: Studies of Our Changing Social Order. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bendix, Reinhard. 1978. Kings or People: Power and the Mandate To Rule. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Suzanne B., ed. 1981. Organizing Interests in Western Europe: Pluralism, Corporatism, and the Transformation of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bergquist, Charles. 1986. Labor in Latin America: Comparative Essays on Chile, Argentina, Venezuela, and Columbia. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Burger, Thomas. 1976. Max Weber's Theory of Concept Formation: History, Laws, and Ideal Types. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Canfield, John V., ed. 1986. Method and Essence. Vol. 5 of The Philosophy of Wittgenstein. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Churchland, Patricia Smith. 1987. “Epistemology in the Age of Neuroscience.” Journal of Philosophy 74:544–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, David, ed. 1979. The New Authoritarianism in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Collier, David. 1993. “Bureaucratic Authoritarianism.” In The Oxford Companion to World Politics, ed. Krieger, Joel. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins, and Collier, David. 1991. Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1956. A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1963. Modern Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice–Hall.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Di Palma, Giuseppe. 1990. To Craft Democracies: An Essay on Democratic Transitions. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gallie, W. B. 1956. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (London) 56:167–98.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Goldman, Alvin. 1987. “Cognitive Science and Metaphysics.” Journal of Philosophy 74:537–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstone, Jack A. 1991. Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hallett, Garth. 1977. A Companion to Wittgenstein's “Philosophical Investigations.” Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Karl, Terry Lynn. 1990. “Dilemmas of Democratization in Latin America.” Comparative Politics 23:1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lembruch, Gerhard, and Schmitter, Philippe C., eds. 1982. Patterns of Corporatist Policy-making. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1964. “An Authoritarian Regime: Spain.” In Cleavages, Ideologies and Party Systems, ed. Allardt, Erik and Littunen, Yrjo. Helsinki: Academic Bookstore.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1973. “The Future of an Authoritarian Situation or the Institutionalization of an Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Brazil.” In Authoritarian Brazil, ed. Stepan, Alfred. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1975. “Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes.” In Handbook of Political Science, ed. Greenstein, Fred and Polsby, Nelson. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J., and Stepan, Alfred, eds. 1978. The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Rokkan, Stein. 1967. “Cleavages, Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction.” In Party Systems and Voter Alignments, ed. Lipset, Seymour Martin and Rokkan, Stein. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Luebbert, Gregory M. 1991. Liberalism, Fascism, or Social Democracy: Social Classes and the Political Origins of Regimes in Interwar Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1971. Against the Self-Images of the Age: Essays on Ideology and Philosophy. New York: Schocken.Google Scholar
Malloy, James M., ed. 1977. Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Barrington Jr., 1966. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman H., Powell, G. Bingham Jr., and Prewitt, Kenneth. 1969. “Social Structure and Political Participation: Developmental Relationships I.” American Political Science Review 63:361–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo A. 1973. Modernization and Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics. Politics of Modernization Series, no. 9. Berkeley: University of California, Institute of International Studies.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo A., Schmitter, Philippe C., and Whitehead, Laurence, eds. 1986. Transitions from Authoritarian Rule. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Ostiguy, Pierre. 1993. “Democracy: A ‘Radial Concept’?” University of California, Berkeley. Typescript.Google Scholar
Paige, Jeffery M. 1975. Agrarian Revolution: Social Movements and Export Agriculture in the Underdeveloped World. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Pastor, Robert A., ed. 1989. Democracy in the Americas: Stopping the Pendulum. New York: Holmes & Meier.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, and Teune, Henry. 1970. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Rabinow, Paul, and Sullivan, William M., eds. 1987. Interpretive Social Science: A Second Look. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Rokkan, Stein. 1970. Citizens, Elections, Parties: Approaches to the Comparative Study of Processes of Development. New York: David McKay.Google Scholar
Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Stephens, Evelyne Huber, and Stephens, John D.. 1992. Capitalist Development and Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1970. “Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics.” American Political Science Review 64:1033–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1984. “Guidelines for Concept Analysis.” In Social Science Concepts: A Systematic Analysis, ed. Sartori, Giovanni. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Philippe C. 1971. Interest Conflict and Political Change in Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Philippe C. 1974. “Still the Century of Corporatism?” Review of Politics 36:85–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitter, Philippe C., and Karl, Terry Lynn. 1991. “What Democracy Is … and Is Not.” Journal of Democracy 2:75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitter, Philippe C., and Karl, Terry Lynn. 1992. “The Types of Democracy Emerging in Southern and Eastern Europe and South and Central America.” In Bound to Change: Consolidating Democracy in East Central Europe, ed. Volten, Peter M. E.. New York: Institute for EastWest Studies.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Philippe C., and Lembruch, Gerhard, eds. 1979. Trends toward Corporatist Intermediation. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1950. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. 3d ed. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skocpol, Theda, ed. 1984. Vision and Method in Historical Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stepan, Alfred, ed. 1973. Authoritarian Brazil: Origins, Policies, and Future. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred. 1978. The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1971. “Interpretation and the Sciences of Man.” Review of Metaphysics 25:3–51.Google Scholar
Tilly, Charles, ed. 1975. The Formation of National States in Western Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tilly, Charles. 1984. Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Trimberger, Ellen Kay. 1978. Revolution from Above: Military Bureaucrats and Development in Japan, Turkey, Egypt, and Peru. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Ed. Roth, Guenther and Wittich, Claus. Trans. Fischoff, Ephraim et al. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Winch, Peter. 1958. The Idea of a Social Science. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1968. Philosophical Investigations. 3d ed. London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.