Suchergebnisse

Comparative politics is the only one of the political science subdisciplines that is defined in methodological rather than substantive terms. Since, however, scientific enterprises are always and unavoidably comparative, any emphasis on comparison and comparative method is certainly less than helpful in attempts to grasp the meaning of the term "comparatie politics". According to general usage in political science, comparativists are engrossed in political similarities and differences between countries; this lexical definition, however, corresponds poorly with stipulative definitions embedded in the practice of research. For one thing, by performing important hypothesis-generating and similar tasks, studies of one case form a central and integrated feature of comparative politics. Furthermore, much comparative research moves on the levels of individuals and groups, and makes use of countries as contexts rather than units. As political science has matured to be a nomotetic discipline, aiming at the building of empirically falsifiable explanatory theory, the crossing of borders in space and time has become a necessity, and comparative politics is today much more than an isolated political science compartment only. References.

The first decade of the 21st century has brought with it two important breakthroughs in the study of comparative politics. The first one concerns the availability of data. Nowadays, access to a wide range of information sources for a large number of countries in the world can be gained without too much effort. The second one concerns the methodological achievements made in recent years. Today, sophisticated multi-level analyses can be conducted fairly easily. Among qualitatively oriented researchers, Charles Ragin has made a significant contribution by introducing the fs/QCA-technique into the field of political science. However, the growing amount of data & the new methods not only open up new possibilities for the researcher. The present article explicitly deals with the problems related to the use of multi-level analyses & fs/QCA in comparative political research. In addition, attention is drawn to the drawbacks of using survey data from heterogeneous settings. Adapted from the source document.

This article presents a way of dealing scientifically with the problem of comparison among dynamically evolving units of analysis in social science, namely by using methods from theoretical, computational & mathematical biology & phylogeny (evolutionary tree) analysis. First, the standard political science & static method of comparative analysis is criticized. Second, some important aspects of the dynamic comparison are presented from its multidisciplinary & historic context, commenting on the compatibility with evolutionary institutional as well as universal Darwinian theoretical perspectives. Third, dynamic comparison is approached using first techniques from standard social science statistical software (SPSS) & then from molecular genetics (MEGA, Molecular Evolutionary Analysis). Examples of evolutionary tree analyses of the European nations are presented & discussed. Similarities & dissimilarities between social science & biological applications of the dynamic comparison techniques are discussed, emphasizing the importance of openness to new techniques & application of panel data for elaboration of new methods of dynamic comparative analyses in social sciences. 2 Tables, 9 Figures, 68 References. Adapted from the source document.