This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by BOSWELL, T. Articles by BROWN, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Scope of General Theory

Methods for Linking Deductive and Inductive Comparative History

Emory University

CLIFF BROWN

University of New Hampshire

A "holy war" is being fought within comparative historical sociology between deductivists and inductivists over the scope of general theory. The issues include broad versus narrow scope conditions, explicit versus contingent theorizing, and theory testing versus theory building. The irony of the conflict is that each side makes ample use of the other's product, despite condemning its progenitor. The authors offer a hierarchical approach to qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) as a method for linking deductive and inductive approaches, and link QCA to game theory as a way to design more dynamic comparative studies. The authors illustrate this method through a split labor market analysis of interracial conflict and cooperation in nine U.S. labor organizing drives.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Hodson A Meta-Analysis of Workplace Ethnographies: Race, Gender, and Employee Attitudes and Behaviors Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, February 1, 2004; 33(1): 4 - 38. [Abstract] [PDF]