{"title":"Comment to: “Case-to-Factor Ratios and Model Specification in Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)”","authors":"A. Dușa, A. Marx","doi":"10.1177/1525822x231159462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article by Thiem and Mkrtchyan appears in a context of rising interest about the number of cases needed to perform a QCA analysis. They question the benchmark tables proposed by Marx and Dușa (2011) and conclude the ratios from those tables are “misplaced.” We believe this conclusion deviates from the scientific method and focus on two essential aspects: (1) their approach to the case to factor ratios and (2) omitted variable bias. We conclude our tables hold until a better alternative is proposed and encourage QCA researchers to continue using them.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Field Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x231159462","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The article by Thiem and Mkrtchyan appears in a context of rising interest about the number of cases needed to perform a QCA analysis. They question the benchmark tables proposed by Marx and Dușa (2011) and conclude the ratios from those tables are “misplaced.” We believe this conclusion deviates from the scientific method and focus on two essential aspects: (1) their approach to the case to factor ratios and (2) omitted variable bias. We conclude our tables hold until a better alternative is proposed and encourage QCA researchers to continue using them.
期刊介绍：
Field Methods (formerly Cultural Anthropology Methods) is devoted to articles about the methods used by field wzorkers in the social and behavioral sciences and humanities for the collection, management, and analysis data about human thought and/or human behavior in the natural world. Articles should focus on innovations and issues in the methods used, rather than on the reporting of research or theoretical/epistemological questions about research. High-quality articles using qualitative and quantitative methods-- from scientific or interpretative traditions-- dealing with data collection and analysis in applied and scholarly research from writers in the social sciences, humanities, and related professions are all welcome in the pages of the journal.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
