The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Case Study and Theory in Political Science
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Global IR's criticism focuses on realism (W Brown, 2006: 125), meaning that exploring realist avenues towards global IR can be read as a hard case (on hard cases: Eckstein, 2009: 118;King et al., 1994: 209;Levy, 2008: 12).”
From Realist avenues to global International Relations (2020) · cites this paper as Eckstein, 2009
Citations
Cited by
Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research
Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. (2011) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.55 · Cited by 1,316
The Strategy of Paired Comparison: Toward a Theory of Practice
Tarrow, S. (2010) · Comparative Political Studies · doi:10.1177/0010414009350044 · Cited by 597
Does Indiscriminate Violence Incite Insurgent Attacks?: Evidence from Chechnya
Lyall, J. (2009) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/0022002708330881 · Cited by 499
Bouwen, P. (2004) · European Journal of Political Research · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2004.00157.x · Cited by 432
Inclusion without Influence? NGOs in European Trade Policy
DÜR, A., & DE BIÈVRE, D. (2007) · Journal of Public Policy · doi:10.1017/s0143814x0700061x · Cited by 313
Metadata
- Authors
- Eckstein, H.
- Venue
- Case Study Method
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications Ltd
- Published
- 2009
- Pages
- 118-164
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 0
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Case Study and Theory in Political Science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4135/9780857024367.d11
- The paper
- Eckstein, H. (2009). Case Study and Theory in Political Science. Case Study Method. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857024367.d11
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
