Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:23:17.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Transparency: The Revolution in Qualitative Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 December 2013

Andrew Moravcsik*
Affiliation:
Princeton University

Extract

Qualitative political science, the use of textual evidence to reconstruct causal mechanisms across a limited number of cases, is currently undergoing a methodological revolution. Many qualitative scholars—whether they use traditional case-study analysis, analytic narrative, structured focused comparison, counterfactual analysis, process tracing, ethnographic and participant-observation, or other methods—now believe that the richness, rigor, and transparency of qualitative research ought to be fundamentally improved.

Type
Symposium: Openness in Political Science
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2014 

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

REFERENCES

American Political Science Association (APSA). 2012. Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science. (Changes adopted by the Committee on Professional Ethics, Rights, and Freedoms, July.) Available at: https://www.apsanet.org/content_2483.cfm.Google Scholar
American Political Science Association (APSA). 2013. “Guidelines for Data Access and Research Transparency for Qualitative Research in Political Science.” August 7. Available at: http://www.apsanet.org/media/PDFs/QUAL%20DART%20Guidelines%20for%20Data%20Access%20and%20Research%20Transparency%20August%207%202013.pdf.Google Scholar
Beach, Derek, and Pedersen, R. B.. 2013. Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, Andrew, and Elman, Colin. 2006. “Qualitative Research: Recent Developments in Case Study Methods.” Annual Review of Political Science 9: 455–76.Google Scholar
Bennett, Andrew, and Elman, Colin. 2007. “Case Study Methods in the International Relations Subfield.” Comparative Political Studies 40 (2): 170–95.Google Scholar
Bennett, Andrew, and George, Alexander. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brady, Henry, and Collier, David, eds. 2004. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Christensen, T. J. 2011. Worse Than a Monolith: Alliance Politics and Problems of Coercive Diplomacy in Asia. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Elman, Colin, and Elman, M. F.. 2001. Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gaddis, John. L. 2002. The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past. Oxford: Oxford University Press Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.” In The Interpretation of Cultures, ed. Geertz, C., 330. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Goertz, Gary, and Mahoney, James. 2012. A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Khong, Yuen Foong. 1992. Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Klotz, Audie, and Prakash, Deepa. 2009. Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lieberman, Evan S. 2010. “Bridging the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Best Practices in the Development of Historically Oriented Replication Databases.” Annual Review of Political Science 13: 3759.Google Scholar
Lieshout, Robert. 2012. “Europe United: Power Politics and the Making of the European Community by Sebastian Rosato (Review).” Journal of Cold War Studies 14: 234–37.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2010. “Active Citation: A Precondition for Replicable Qualitative Research.” PS: Political Science and Politics 43: 2935.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2012a. “Active Citation and Qualitative Political Science.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 10: 3337.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2012b. “Methodological Memo: How to Create Active Citations Using MSWord” (Unpublished Memorandum, Princeton University, March 2012). Available at: http://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/active_citations.docx.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2013a. “Did Power Politics Cause European Integration? Realist Theory Meets Qualitative Methods.” Security Studies 22: 118.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2013b. “An Example of an Active Citation: James Scovel on Thaddeus Stevens' Famous Quotation” (Methodological Memo, Princeton 2013). Available at: http://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/example.docx.Google Scholar
. Moravcsik, Andrew. forthcoming. “One Click Away: The Transparency Revolution in Qualitative International Relations.” Security Studies.Google Scholar
Mosley, Layna. 2013. Interview Research in Political Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rosato, Sebastian. 2011. Europe United: Power Politics and the Making of the European Community. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Saunders, Elizabeth. 2011. Leaders at War: How Presidents Shape Military Interventions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, Jack. 1989. The Ideology of the Offensive: Military Decision Making and the Disasters of 1914. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Trachtenberg, Marc. 2009. The Craft of International History: A Guide to Method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Van Evera, Steven. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Sciences. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar