Two-sample test for ambivalent subset relationship in fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis

Q1 Mathematics Quality & Quantity Pub Date : 2023-05-30 DOI:10.1007/s11135-023-01687-8
Francesco Veri
{"title":"Two-sample test for ambivalent subset relationship in fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis","authors":"Francesco Veri","doi":"10.1007/s11135-023-01687-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), ambivalent subset relationships (ASR), occur when solution term X is in subset relation with the outcome Y and its absence ~ Y, leading to false-positive results. While ASR can be empirically detected in small-N and medium-N cases through in-depth case knowledge, it is challenging to identify them in large-N case designs. QCA parameters such as proportion reduction inconsistency (PRI) and consistency are commonly used to identify simultaneous subset relationships (SSR), but they are not specifically designed to detect ASR. To address this issue, this article introduces the DTS test, a new test based on two-sample statistics. The DTS test identifies distributional convergence between a solution term’s empirical cumulative distribution function (eCDF) and an eCDF of solution formulas with asymptotic ASR characteristics. By comparing empirical solutions’ patterns with spurious artificially built solutions' patterns, the DTS test reduces the risk of causal fallacies in interpreting the empirical results. Overall, the DTS test provides a valuable tool for identifying and addressing potential ASR bias in fsQCA, particularly in large-N case designs.","PeriodicalId":49649,"journal":{"name":"Quality & Quantity","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality & Quantity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01687-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), ambivalent subset relationships (ASR), occur when solution term X is in subset relation with the outcome Y and its absence ~ Y, leading to false-positive results. While ASR can be empirically detected in small-N and medium-N cases through in-depth case knowledge, it is challenging to identify them in large-N case designs. QCA parameters such as proportion reduction inconsistency (PRI) and consistency are commonly used to identify simultaneous subset relationships (SSR), but they are not specifically designed to detect ASR. To address this issue, this article introduces the DTS test, a new test based on two-sample statistics. The DTS test identifies distributional convergence between a solution term’s empirical cumulative distribution function (eCDF) and an eCDF of solution formulas with asymptotic ASR characteristics. By comparing empirical solutions’ patterns with spurious artificially built solutions' patterns, the DTS test reduces the risk of causal fallacies in interpreting the empirical results. Overall, the DTS test provides a valuable tool for identifying and addressing potential ASR bias in fsQCA, particularly in large-N case designs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
模糊集定性比较分析中矛盾子集关系的双样本检验
摘要在模糊集定性比较分析(fsQCA)中,当解项X与结果Y处于子集关系且不存在时,会产生矛盾子集关系(ASR),从而导致假阳性结果。虽然通过深入的病例知识可以在小n和中n病例中经验地检测到ASR,但在大n病例设计中识别它们是具有挑战性的。QCA参数(如比例减少不一致性(PRI)和一致性)通常用于识别同步子集关系(SSR),但它们不是专门用于检测ASR的。为了解决这个问题,本文介绍了DTS测试,这是一种基于双样本统计的新测试。DTS检验确定了解项的经验累积分布函数(eCDF)和具有渐近ASR特征的解公式的eCDF之间的分布收敛性。通过比较实证解决方案的模式与虚假的人为构建的解决方案的模式,DTS检验降低了解释实证结果的因果谬误的风险。总的来说,DTS测试为识别和解决fsQCA中潜在的ASR偏差提供了一个有价值的工具,特别是在大n的案例设计中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Quality & Quantity
Quality & Quantity 管理科学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
276
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality and Quantity constitutes a point of reference for European and non-European scholars to discuss instruments of methodology for more rigorous scientific results in the social sciences. In the era of biggish data, the journal also provides a publication venue for data scientists who are interested in proposing a new indicator to measure the latent aspects of social, cultural, and political events. Rather than leaning towards one specific methodological school, the journal publishes papers on a mixed method of quantitative and qualitative data. Furthermore, the journal’s key aim is to tackle some methodological pluralism across research cultures. In this context, the journal is open to papers addressing some general logic of empirical research and analysis of the validity and verification of social laws. Thus The journal accepts papers on science metrics and publication ethics and, their related issues affecting methodological practices among researchers. Quality and Quantity is an interdisciplinary journal which systematically correlates disciplines such as data and information sciences with the other humanities and social sciences. The journal extends discussion of interesting contributions in methodology to scholars worldwide, to promote the scientific development of social research.
期刊最新文献
Biodegradable electronics: a two-decade bibliometric analysis Developing the halal-sufficiency scale: a preliminary insight Measuring income inequality via percentile relativities. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches / sixth edition Using biograms to promote life course research. An example of theoretical case configuration relating to paths of social exclusion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1