Cited by 1,140Qualitative Comparative Analysis ResearchPhilosophy of Biology and Scientific ExplanationPolitical Science Research and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines

Open access
Beach, Derek, Pedersen, Rasmus·2013·University of Michigan Press eBooks

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3998/mpub.2556282

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Beach, D., & Pedersen, R.
Venue
University of Michigan Press eBooks
Published
2013
OpenAlex
W4234465239
Cited by
1,140
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 136 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 90 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 154 · 2019: 85 · 2018: 123 · 2017: 84 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 6
FWCI
39.15
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
University of Michigan Press eBooks (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
Keywords
process tracing, causal inference, qualitative research, causal mechanisms, historical causation

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