CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,132Political Theory and DemocracyPolitical Science Research and EducationPolitical Conflict and Governance

Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research

Open access
Collier, David, Levitsky, Steven·1997·World Politics
DOI 10.1353/wp.1997.0009
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The recent trend toward democratization in countries across the globe has challenged scholars to pursue two potentially contradictory goals. On the one hand, they seek to increase analytic differentiation in order to capture the diverse forms of democracy that have emerged. On the other hand, they are concerned with conceptual validity. Specifically, they seek to avoid the problem of conceptual stretching that arises when the concept of democracy is applied to cases for which, by relevant scholarly standards, it is not appropriate. This article argues that the pursuit of these two goals has led to a proliferation of conceptual innovations, including numerous subtypes of democracy—that is to say, democracy “with adjectives.” The article explores the strengths and weaknesses of alternative strategies of conceptual innovation that have emerged: descending and climbing Sartori's ladder of generality, generating “diminished” subtypes of democracy, “precising” the definition of democracy by adding defining attributes, and shifting the overarching concept with which democracy is associated. The goal of the analysis is to make more comprehensible the complex structure of these strategies, as well as to explore trade-offs among the strategies. Even when scholars proceed intuitively, rather than self-consciously, they tend to operate within this structure. Yet it is far more desirable for them to do so selfconsciously, with a full awareness of these trade-offs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1353/wp.1997.0009

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Deciding which cases constitute an example of the phenomenon of interest while maintaining the concept's validity and without stretching the concept is an issue.

    “The first issue is deciding which cases constitute an example of the phenomenon of interest (e.g., the example of democracy) while maintaining the concept's validity and without stretching the concept”

    From A qualitative assessment of QCA: method stretching in large-N studies and temporality (2022) · cites this paper as Collier and Levitsky 1997

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. PARTIAL DEMOCRACIES: EXAMPLES OF DIMINISHED SUBTYPES •Ronald P. Archer, "Party Strength and Weakness in Colombia's Besieged Democracy," in Scott Mainwaring and Timothy R. Scully, eds., Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin Amer- ica (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 166.
  2. hGeorg Sorensen, Democracy and Democratization: Process and Prospects in a Changing World (Boul- der, Colo.: Westview Press, 1993), 20.
  3. dBruce Michael Bagley, "Colombia: National Front and Economic Development," in Robert Wes- son, ed., Politics, Policies, and Economic Development in Latin America (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1984), 125.
  4. 'Adrian Leftwich, "Governance, Democracy, and Development in the Third World," Third World Quarterly 14 (1993), 613.
  5. rcarlos H. Waisman, "Argentina: Autarkic Industrialization and Illegitaimacy," in Larry Diamond, Juan J. Linz, and Seymour Martin Lipset, eds., Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1989), 69. •Axel Hadenius, "The Duration of Democracy: Institutional vs. Socio-economic Factors," in David Beetham, ed. Defining and Measuring Democracy (London: Sage Publications, 1994), 69.
  6. Catherine M. Conaghan and Rosario Espinal, "UnlikelyTransitions to Uncertain Regimes? Democracy without Compromise in the Dominican Re- public and Ecuador," Journal of Latin American Studies 22 (October 1990), 555;

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Collier, D., & Levitsky, S.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
World Politics
Publisher
Project MUSE
Published
1997-04
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
430-451
ISSN
  • 0043-8871 (ISSN-L)
  • 1086-3338
DOI
10.1353/wp.1997.0009
OpenAlex
W2168830357
Cited by
2,132
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 107 · 2022: 80 · 2021: 123 · 2020: 166 · 2019: 129 · 2018: 111 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 73 · 2015: 76 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 81 · 2012: 87
FWCI
142.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 5186 d)
Locations
  • World Politics (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9022192)
  • Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University
  • Center for Advanced Study, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
democracy, conceptual innovation, conceptual validity, conceptual stretching, democratic theory, democratization, comparative research 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