Cited by 1,784Qualitative Comparative Analysis ResearchFuzzy and Soft Set TheoryPolitical Science Research and Education

Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage

Ragin, Charles C.·2006·Political Analysis

Abstract

Because of its inherently asymmetric nature, set-theoretic analysis offers many interesting contrasts with analysis based on correlations. Until recently, however, social scientists have been slow to embrace set-theoretic approaches. The perception was that this type of analysis is restricted to primitive, binary variables and that it has little or no tolerance for error. With the advent of “fuzzy” sets and the recognition that even rough set-theoretic relations are relevant to theory, these old barriers have crumbled. This paper advances the set-theoretic approach by presenting simple descriptive measures that can be used to evaluate set-theoretic relationships, especially relations between fuzzy sets. The first measure, “consistency,” assesses the degree to which a subset relation has been approximated, whereas the second measure, “coverage,” assesses the empirical relevance of a consistent subset. This paper demonstrates further that set-theoretic coverage can be partitioned in a manner somewhat analogous to the partitioning of explained variation in multiple regression analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/pan/mpj019

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ragin, C. C.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Ragin, Charles C.
Venue
Political Analysis
Published
2006
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
291-310
ISSN
  • 1047-1987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4989
OpenAlex
W2150935468
Cited by
1,784
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 171 · 2025: 188 · 2024: 172 · 2023: 159 · 2022: 138 · 2021: 153 · 2020: 108 · 2019: 115 · 2018: 86 · 2017: 87 · 2016: 93 · 2015: 79 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 61 · 2012: 26
FWCI
66.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Political Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Fuzzy and Soft Set Theory
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
Keywords
set-theoretic analysis, fuzzy sets, rough set theory, consistency measure, coverage measures, subset relation, explained variance, partitioning, binary variables, social science methodology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review