Cited by 194Qualitative Comparative Analysis ResearchPolitical Science Research and EducationSocial Policy and Reform Studies

QCA, 25 Years after “The Comparative Method”: Mapping, Challenges, and Innovations—Mini-Symposium

Rihoux, Benoît, Marx, Axel·2013·Political Research Quarterly

Abstract

Current standard practices put sufficiency at the core of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), while the analysis of necessity is limited to the test of necessary conditions. Here, we argue that the possibilities of QCA in the latter domain are much greater. In particular, it can be used to empirically confront theories centered on necessary relations and that involved various conditions. A new operation, labeled "the systemic necessity assessment," is therefore introduced. To show its added value, a published QCA study that confronts theories centered on necessary relations but using regular minimization is replicated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1065912912468269

Cites

0 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

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rihoux, B., & Marx, A.
Affiliations
  • UCLouvain (BE)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Venue
Political Research Quarterly
Published
2013-02-12
Volume
66
Issue
1
Pages
167-235
ISSN
  • 1065-9129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-274X
OpenAlex
W2737577877
Cited by
194
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7
FWCI
54.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Political Research Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
Keywords
qualitative comparative analysis, configurational analysis, welfare state typology, robustness testing, research quality

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