Qualitative Transparency Deliberations

Second, however, several participants in these exchanges noted (as I would as well) that traditional methods training, which is historically weak on interview methodology, is particularly so on questions of transparency and reporting of interview data. This is, therefore, an area where identificati...

Good question. My highest hope is that the move towards analytic transparency will bring greater recognition to high-quality qualitative research. That would indeed be excellent. Qualitative research is just as challenging if not more so that other methodological approaches, and it would be great f...

As a way to reflect across various of the discussion threads, what are your hopes and fears regarding any norms that might emerge on analytic transparency for comparative and process tracing research? To get things going, I hope that this process will encourage us to think more carefully about our e...

I'm finally getting around to responding to Marcus' earlier post on the Bayesian approach. I agree that the Bayesian framework provides a very useful framework for analytical transparency (despite a number of challenges), and it helps us take background information seriously, as Marcus rightly notes...

Thank you for these thoughts Rick. Making inferences from interview information certainly requires careful thought. I would encourage you to take a look at my paper with A.E. Charman--we devote a whole section to talking about how to define and analyze interview evidence from a Bayesian perspective....

We have an interesting post stream recently started on the comparative/process tracing blog that it quite relevant to the discussion ongoing here and would welcome further comments. I'm taking the liberty of quoting PAHall's post here as well: "Surely a concern for all non-statistical studies i...

Thank you very much for these comments Peter. I entirely agree--background information is extremely important, and we should aim to explain how it informs our analytical judgements, but within reason. There is no way to enumerate all of the background knowledge on which we draw. I think authors need...

I expect that a range of practices will emerge, with some researchers using formal Bayesian analysis extensively on many pieces of evidence, both in their own thinking and in their publications, and others using it infrequently or not at all. I am interested in what Tasha and others have to say on ...

I would like to agree with Jane that this kind of requirement could serve as a significant disincentive for conducting qualitative research, which has made major contributions across all fields of political science--alongside concerns about human subjects, and the problem of access to key informants...

Thank you Jane, We are aiming to discuss both process tracing and comparative analysis. On process tracing, you might take a look at the thread on Bayesianism and alternatives, where we've posted some links to current works on this topic. More generally, we would welcome any thoughts on specific pro...

The comments below are all relevant to this thread, so I've moved them here. Do also have a look at Andy Bennett's previous post on Bayesianism and transparency. Hillel Soifer: I'm taking the liberty of pulling Ingo's quote from another thread here to ask this question more generally: should all qua...

Thank for your post Veronica! These are all interesting points. Regarding the Bleich and Pekkanen article, I think its important to point out that their perspective comes from survey research, where the norm is random sampling from a population, and things like response rates, non-response bias, and...

A quick note to add that I agree with both Ryan and Heather. Most qualitative research is inductive, and very often cases are identified and scored during the process of research, not from the outset. I would add that inductive research of this type is fully justified within a Bayesian framework. Ba...

Thank you for these thoughts. I think your comments on right on, and they go to the core issue of what expectations are both reasonable for authors and also helpful for readers. I would agree that we gather so much "background information" (in Bayesian terms) that informs our inferences th...

How useful are frameworks for formalizing our thinking in process tracing research (e.g. Bayesian analysis; Van Evera’s process tracing tests), and how desirable is their explicit application in empirical work? For reference, examples of these approaches and how and when they might be applied in pra...

How should scholars present the evidentiary basis of their analysis? Is it best to discuss the evidence holistically as part of the published analysis? Should we use active citations? When might compiling a list of specific pieces of evidence be helpful?

Building on Hillel's question, what are some exemplars of process tracing and/or comparative historical analysis that could inform our discussion of transparency, and what are the features that make these works compelling?