Article contents
Guarding Against False Positives in Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 January 2017
Abstract
The various methodological techniques that fall under the umbrella description of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) are increasingly popular for modeling causal complexity and necessary or sufficient conditions in medium-N settings. Because QCA methods are not designed as statistical techniques, however, there is no way to assess the probability that the patterns they uncover are the result of chance. Moreover, the implications of the multiple hypothesis tests inherent in these techniques for the false positive rate of the results are not widely understood. This article fills both gaps by tailoring a simple permutation test to the needs of QCA users and adjusting the Type I error rate of the test to take into account the multiple hypothesis tests inherent in QCA. An empirical application–a reexamination of a study of protest-movement success in the Arab Spring–highlights the need for such a test by showing that even very strong QCA results may plausibly be the result of chance.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology
Footnotes
Author's note: Thanks to Christopher Achen, David Collier, Jirka Lewandowski, the scholars who attended the 2014 summer seminars on Boolean logit at WZB Berlin, and those who attended my sessions at the 2014 IQMR Summer Institute in Syracuse, New York, for valuable feedback, and to Andrew Rosenberg and Austin Knuppe for invaluable research assistance. Replication Data are available on the Dataverse site for this article, http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/GY6P9I.
References
- 56
- Cited by