Suchergebnisse

Data provides the means by which science progresses, legislation changes, and society advances; data is the enemy of witch hunts, bigotry and ignorance (not to mention Creationism). But data is always gathered at a certain time with a certain purpose; and to be useful it must be mined, parsed, and presented. Each step of this process involves decisions about what to omit and what to prioritise. Yet the end result, the visualisation, carries an authority, timelessness, and objectivity that belies its origins. Curiously, this fact is neglected in the otherwise rich discourse around data visualisation and information design.

As the incoming President of the QMMR section, I want to begin by thanking Lisa Wedeen for her service in this role over the past two years and Colin Elman, the indefatigable Secretary- Treasurer of this section for all the work he has done over many years to keep it running and robust, as well as the editors of this publication and the members of the section's Executive Committee for the time they devote to the profession. Since its founding in 2003, this section has become one of the largest and most vibrant in the APSA, reflecting an efflorescence of new work and debate about qualitative and multi-methods in political research.

Building on a Lakatosian approach that sees Social Science as an endeavour that confronts rival theories with systematic empirical observations, this article responds to probing questions that have been raised about the appropriate ways in which to conduct systematic process analysis and comparative enquiry. It explores varieties of process tracing, the role of interpretation in case studies, and the relationship between process tracing and comparative historical analysis. Adapted from the source document.