The Strategy of Paired Comparison: Toward a Theory of Practice

“See discussion in Tarrow (2010).”

“The comparison in the paper is based on a most similar case design (Eckstein, 1975; Tarrow, 2010; Gisselquist, 2014; Lijphart, 1971: 683).”

“However, we propose to highlight meaningful parallels between them through a “paired comparison” approach with theory-building purposes (Tarrow 2010).”

“Our research strategy is a paired comparison, which enables us to account not only for convergent trends between Croatia and Serbia, but also to pinpoint and elucidate important differences between them (Tarrow, 2010).”

“This methodological approach is compatible with a study based on two cases—a comparative design that allows for an appropriate balance between “descriptive depth and analytical challenge” (Tarrow, 2010, p. 246).”

“…selection The methodological approach used here relies a strategy of comparative analysis known as paired comparison, which is distinctive from both single case studies and multi-case analyses, and provides “a balanced combination of descriptive depth and analytical challenge” (Tarrow 2010, 246).”

“It further supports the value of the methodology of paired comparisons, which has been used in the literature to reach judgements in areas ranging from statistical modelling (Dittrich et al. 2007) to the resolution of political theory problems (Tarrow 2010).”

“Two case studies offer the advantage of allowing for “a balanced combination of descriptive depth and analytical challenge” (Tarrow 2010, 246).”

“Methodologically, in MSSD, we use comparative cases with common systemic characteristics, which are conceived as “controlled for,” whereas the inter-systemic differences are viewed as explanatory variables (Gerring 2007, 139; Przeworski and Teune 1970, 179; Tarrow 2010, 234).”

“Yet , as already noted, the resilience of the French parliament is somewhat of a puzzle, which this ‘paired comparison’ (Tarrow 2010) aims to solve.”

“The research design is a binary study based on comparative analysis, giving in-depth analysis of each group, and then extracting similarities and di ff er-ences between them (Tarrow 2010).”

“Paired comparisons allow for conciliating descriptive depth and analytical capacity (Gisselquist 2014; Tarrow 2010).”

“The paired comparison strategy (Tarrow 2010) is two-dimensional here: it is both cross-organizational and cross-country.”

“We employ a paired comparison research design (Tarrow, 2010) by studying novel public opinion data in Norway and the UK.”

“While some scholars, including some of the best known practitioners of the method of paired comparison (Tarrow 2010) or the method of controlled comparison (Slater and Ziblatt 2013) have continued advocating for these methods’ analytical usefulness rooted in their Millean – albeit critically…”

“It turns out that this framework provides a new and strong justification for traditional approaches to paired comparison (Slater and Ziblatt 2013; Tarrow 2010), especially “method of difference”-type setups with contrasting outcomes across cases.”

“This mechanism is found through a careful examination of processes in which the event commonly observed in both cases results in the similar or contrasting outcomes: as this method cross-examines a pair of cases, Tarrow (2010) refers to it as “dual-process tracing.””

“Yet, instead of looking for a comparative design per se, we allowed the data to show us if more robust comparison by contrast (Tarrow 2010) was needed or were we rather observing two cases of mimetic isomorphism (DiMaggio and Powell 1983) in the global field of higher education (Marginson 2008) in which organisations…”

“In order to investigate the governmental crisis communication during the COVID-19 pandemic, our case selection was driven by a “paired comparison” (Tarrow, 2010) and the method of difference, dating back to John Stuart Mill’s System of Logic (1843/2011).”

“Matching emerges naturally as the statistical analog to the qualitative tradition of paired case comparison (Tarrow 2010).”

“Tarrow (2010: 230) offers a paired comparison as a distinct strategy of comparative analysis with advantages that both single-case and multi-case comparisons lack.”

“Paired comparison is a valuable tool which enables in-depth comparative analysis (Tarrow 2010, p. 244) and addresses the limitations of a single case study.”

“Yet scholars have stressed the utility of paired comparisons for particular purposes (Rueschemeyer, 2003; Slater & Ziblatt, 2013; Tarrow, 2010).”

“Furthermore, paired comparison can prevent overestimating the significance of a hypothesized relationship in a single-case study and allows for deeper investigation of the causal processes than that possible in large-sample studies (Tarrow, 2010).”

“Comparative case studies have been broadly applied in various fields, such as political science (Tarrow, 2010); labour market effects of migration, as described in Card (1990); and even economic costs of terrorist conflicts in Spain (Abadie & Gardeazabal, 2003).”

“In the latter empirical part, I will apply a methodological strategy of paired comparisons with a greater focus on its process ‐tracing qualities (Tarrow 2010).”

“To test this two-part hypothesis, this study utilises a ‘most different systems approach’ in order to understand similar processes in different contexts (Przeworski and Teune 1970) and thereby to identify similar courses of action (Tarrow 2010).”

“This most-different comparison (Tarrow, 2010) is therefore used to illustrate our main argument: that researchers should turn their attention from the public agenda to public agendas.”

“Our selection of Australia, Japan, and Canada reflects the ‘most similar systems’ comparative design (Lijphart, 1975; Tarrow, 2010).”

“According to Tarrow (2010), paired comparison is one of the most widely employed and yet under-theorized methods used in the study of politics and society.”

“As two of Australia’s most populous states, collectively home to 207 of the country’s 537 local governments, NSW and VIC offer a valuable paired subnational comparison of two case studies (Snyder 2001; Tarrow 2010).”

“In terms of research methods, we employ a paired comparison approach, which aligns with the most-similar systems design in comparative politics (Gisselquist, 2014; Tarrow, 2010).”

“Además, esta comparación por pares dificul-ta la posibilidad de que la variable dependiente ocurra, incluso en ausencia de la variable independiente, con lo que aumenta la capacidad inferencial de este tipo de investigación (Tarrow 2010, 244).”

“These fixed, bound models of comparison, which Tarrow (2010) and Slater and Ziblatt (2013) have praised against criticism, are often intended to test theories, a goal that escapes the scope of this paper.”

“The case selection scheme is guided by the importance of illustrating how federal institutional design precludes the attainment of desired governance outcomes in disparate contexts, through a most-different systems (MDS) design (Tarrow, 2010).”

“The research utilised multiple methods, grounding analysis in key expert interviews, policy documents and other empirical data on land use and development statistics (Creswell and Clark, 2011; Tarrow, 2010).”

“The paired comparison (Tarrow 2010) between Canada and France and the Qualitative Media Analysis (QMA) of YouTube comments (see Methodology section) allows for a detailed comparative analysis of narratives about police legitimacy based on the perceptions of actual and specific police operations in…”

“Inthispaper,we adopt the most different design as a research design framework to show how patching works in two very different contexts (Tarrow 2010).”

“According to the paired comparison method (Tarrow, 2010, p. 232–233), each of the five factors—audio materials A, B, C, D, and E—was paired with each of the other audio materials side-by-side.”

“placed to gauge the importance of location and language in processes of “ethnic” mobilization.(24) Mixed-methods are utilized to discern their reactions.”

“The paired comparison method (Kendall & Smit 1940; Tarrow 2010) was also used as it is especially useful where priorities are not clear and where there are not objective data to base decisions on.”

“We argue for the special analytic importance of ‘‘natural experiments’’ in which we can observe change in one aspect of a political system while holding constant (at least initially) most other components (Tarrow 2010).”

“While using a covariational logic, pairwise comparisons integrate a high degree of detail to ensure that the causal connections drawn are real (Peters, 1998, pp. 66-67; Tarrow, 2010).”

“In particular, this paper asks why countries that demonstrate so much similarity - Estonia and Latvia on the one hand, Georgia and Armenia on the other - pursued anti-corruption agendas with different levels of rigour and commitment, which hence explains why they significantly differ on corruption scales? The method o…”