A Robustness Test Protocol for Applied QCA: Theory and R Software Application

IF 6.5 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS Sociological Methods & Research Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI:10.1177/00491241211036158
Ioana-Elena Oană, Carsten Q. Schneider
{"title":"A Robustness Test Protocol for Applied QCA: Theory and R Software Application","authors":"Ioana-Elena Oană, Carsten Q. Schneider","doi":"10.1177/00491241211036158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The robustness of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) results features high on the agenda of methodologists and practitioners. This article aims at advancing this debate on several fronts. First, in line with the extant literature, we take a comprehensive view on robustness arguing that decisions on calibration, consistency, and frequency thresholds should all be tested. Second, we introduce the notion of “sensitivity range” as the range of values for any of these parameters within which the solution formula remains unchanged. Third, we argue that interpreting robustness is more intricate than simply checking if solutions remain unchanged. Beyond sensitivity ranges, researchers should assess robustness by evaluating changes in parameters of fit and the classification of cases as robust, shaky, or possible. Fourth, we enable researchers to perform more than one robustness test at a time by proposing the notions of a “test set”: the overlap between conceptually plausible alternative solutions that can be generated; and of a “robust core”: that part of a QCA solution that withstands the robustness checks. Fifth, we present functionalities implemented in the R package SetMethods that enable researchers to put in practice our proposals. These advancements are integrated into a comprehensive QCA Robustness Test Protocol consisting of three main tests: sensitivity ranges, fit-oriented robustness, and case-oriented robustness. We illustrate the protocol’s implementation with an example on high life expectancy across the globe.","PeriodicalId":21849,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methods & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methods & Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241211036158","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

The robustness of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) results features high on the agenda of methodologists and practitioners. This article aims at advancing this debate on several fronts. First, in line with the extant literature, we take a comprehensive view on robustness arguing that decisions on calibration, consistency, and frequency thresholds should all be tested. Second, we introduce the notion of “sensitivity range” as the range of values for any of these parameters within which the solution formula remains unchanged. Third, we argue that interpreting robustness is more intricate than simply checking if solutions remain unchanged. Beyond sensitivity ranges, researchers should assess robustness by evaluating changes in parameters of fit and the classification of cases as robust, shaky, or possible. Fourth, we enable researchers to perform more than one robustness test at a time by proposing the notions of a “test set”: the overlap between conceptually plausible alternative solutions that can be generated; and of a “robust core”: that part of a QCA solution that withstands the robustness checks. Fifth, we present functionalities implemented in the R package SetMethods that enable researchers to put in practice our proposals. These advancements are integrated into a comprehensive QCA Robustness Test Protocol consisting of three main tests: sensitivity ranges, fit-oriented robustness, and case-oriented robustness. We illustrate the protocol’s implementation with an example on high life expectancy across the globe.
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
应用QCA的鲁棒性测试协议:理论与R软件应用
定性比较分析(QCA)结果的稳健性是方法学家和从业者的重要议程。这篇文章旨在从几个方面推进这场辩论。首先,根据现有文献,我们对稳健性持全面的看法,认为校准、一致性和频率阈值的决策都应该经过测试。其次,我们引入了“灵敏度范围”的概念,即求解公式保持不变的任何参数的值范围。第三,我们认为,解释稳健性比简单地检查解决方案是否保持不变更复杂。除了灵敏度范围外,研究人员还应通过评估拟合参数的变化来评估稳健性,并将病例分类为稳健、不稳定或可能。第四,我们通过提出“测试集”的概念,使研究人员能够一次进行不止一次的稳健性测试:可以生成的概念上合理的替代解决方案之间的重叠;以及“稳健核心”:QCA解决方案中经受住稳健检查的部分。第五,我们介绍了R包SetMethods中实现的功能,使研究人员能够将我们的建议付诸实践。这些进步被集成到一个全面的QCA稳健性测试协议中,该协议由三个主要测试组成:灵敏度范围、面向拟合的稳健性和面向案例的稳健性。我们以全球高预期寿命为例说明了该议定书的实施情况。
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
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Sociological Methods & Research is a quarterly journal devoted to sociology as a cumulative empirical science. The objectives of SMR are multiple, but emphasis is placed on articles that advance the understanding of the field through systematic presentations that clarify methodological problems and assist in ordering the known facts in an area. Review articles will be published, particularly those that emphasize a critical analysis of the status of the arts, but original presentations that are broadly based and provide new research will also be published. Intrinsically, SMR is viewed as substantive journal but one that is highly focused on the assessment of the scientific status of sociology. The scope is broad and flexible, and authors are invited to correspond with the editors about the appropriateness of their articles.
期刊最新文献
Sharing Big Video Data: Ethics, Methods, and Technology Dynamics of Health Expectancy: An Introduction to the Multiple Multistate Method (MMM) Seeded Topic Models in Digital Archives: Analyzing Interpretations of Immigration in Swedish Newspapers, 1945–2019 A Primer on Deep Learning for Causal Inference Untapped Potential: Designed Digital Trace Data in Online Survey Experiments
×
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