You are on page 1of 6

1

B. Guy Peters,
Comparative Politics. Theory and Methods,
New York University Press, 1998

Chapter 1: The importance of Comparison
Comparative Politics is central to the development of political theory. For most sciences,
experimentation is the way to test theory, but for political science, comparison is the principal
method. In an experiment, the purpose is to hold as many factors as possible constant, in order to
permit a single independent variable to operate upon a single dependent variable. In the real world,
however, there are a host of extraneous factors that influence the way people vote, or policies are
made etc. Complexity of real political life means that variables come to the researcher in large
bundles of factors that are almost inextricably intertwined. It is then up to the researcher to
disentangle the sources of variance, to contextualize the findings
The claims of political science to be an empirical method are based largely on comparative analysis.
(but so too is a good deal of the substance of normative political theory).
Challenge: devise the methods necessary to construct meaningful theoretical and analytic statements
about government and politics within those complex and largely unplanned settings.
[Too many?] Forms of Comparative Analysis
A huge variety of approaches to comparative politics. All must confront a fundamental trade-off
between the respective virtues of complexity and generalization (in depth or in extenso?). Another
way to think about these fundamental trade-offs in comparative analysis is to contrast configurative
and statistical methods of analysis.
- Configurative analysis: prime purpose is the thorough description of a case or cases lead to
a thick description. Case-driven perspective
- Statistical explanation has a fundamentally different purpose: to test propositions about the
relationship among political variables across countries and in a variety of settings; at the
extreme, statistical analysis ceases to identify countries as countries, but instead
conceptualises them as packages of variables (one should eliminate proper names of
countries). Variable-driven perspective

Quantity and Quality
The logic of research comparison that undergirds the two approaches is actually very similar.
Conducting either style of social research properly depends upon the same issues of research design.
Both types of research face the task of developing RDs that maximize the observed variance in their
DV that is a function of the presumed IV. They also must minimize error variance. They have also to
deal with extraneous variance.
Qualitative researchers often do not think in terms such as IV and DV, but their research problems
can certainly be expressed in that manner. While statistical research can cope with the problem of
2

other possible causes by introducing control variables to identify and quantify the confounding
causes, qualitative research must deal with the confounding factors through careful RD, greater
attention to the proper selection of cases, and fairness to all causes when doing the research.
He or she needs a theory to guide the research if it is to be truly comparative.

Types of comparative studies
Single country studies
They have the least claim to advancing the scientific status of comparative politics, although it is also
perhaps the most common form of analysis in the discipline. Virtues: 1) Implicit comparison through
a series of single country studies; 2) Explicate a concept that appears to be particularly evident in one
national setting and to use the country study to develop that concept (concept-defining studies).
Consociationalism, social capital.
Process and institution studies
Select a small number of instances of a process or an institution that appear similar in some important
ways and then use those instances to illuminate the nature of either the process or the institution itself.
The purpose is to develop lower-level comparisons of a particular institution or political process
(assumed to be almost independent of the setting within which they occur). Comparative analysis of
public policy formulation and implementation (functionalist thinking).
Typology formation
Develop typologies of countries or of different components of the political system. Typologies imply
the interaction of two or more variables to produce a classification system (this being the beginning of
a theory about the subject matter. Taxonomies (simple listings).
Regional statistical analyses
Goal: make a generalisation only about one region. Problem: encourage conceptual stretching once
they are extended beyond the original area of enquiry.
Global statistical studies
Applied to the entire population of countries. Deficiencies: involve substantial conceptual stretching
and measurement errors. They may have produced a number of significant correlations statistically,
but it is not always very clear what the substantive importance of these efforts was.
Summary
Flaws and objections. Desirability of triangulation, multiple methods and approaches

The content of comparisons
The logic of a comparative analysis is almost the same regardless of what the geographical or
temporal focus of the comparison may be. Comparative analysis across subnational units within a
3

single nation-state is also a fruitful form of political analysis. Virtue: it holds constant or minimises a
number of factors that might otherwise confound it.

Cross-time comparison
Can also be made within the same political unit across time. Pooled time-series approach. Same slices
of chronological time? No (modernization).

Summary
To be effective in developing theory, and in being able to make statements about structures larger than
an individual or the small group, the social sciences must be comparative.
There are questions a comparativist should at least think about before embarking no data collection
and analysis.
Any choice of a research strategy involves sacrificing some virtues in order to achieve more of others.
The one thing that should be universal in studying comparative politics is a conscious attention to
explanation and research design. [Below: the foundations of RD.]
- What is the thing the researcher wants to explain the DV?
- What is the presumed cause of the phenomenon in question? It is better for the development
of the discipline of political science if that presumed cause is related to some broader
theoretical concerns.
- What evidence is needed to prove the connection between cause and effect, and how can that
evidence be mustered?
- How can we be as sure as possible about the quality of our evidence?

Chapter 2: The logic of comparison
The real difficulty for the social sciences is making convincing statements about the causation of
political phenomena, given the complexity of interactions among the whole range of social
phenomena and the number of external sources of variance. J.S. Mill concerned with the problem of
proving causation. However, many social scientists remain very sceptical about any claims of
causation. Even Mill believed that the complexity of the causal relationships encountered in social
enquiry limited the possibility of discovering meaningful causal relations.
The logic of comparative analysis is different from other logics and especially from the statistical
method. They treat differently the crucial question of controlling sources of variance.
Mill: The Method of Agreement, the Method of Difference, the Method of Concomitant Variation to
demonstrate a causal connection between variables.
The basic problem is to isolate a factor or a limited number of factors that appear to produce changes
in the dependent variable, in other words to identify possible ways to exclude the numerous possible
4

confounding factors. We should have adequate theoretical guidance about where to look for the other
variables.

Comparative Research Design
The fundamental litany for social research: Maximize experimental variance, minimise error
variance, and control extraneous variance.
Experimental variance (observed changes in the DV that are a function of the IV identified as central
to the analysis). One has to make sure that:
1) The DV does vary. e.g.: study not only the countries that democratized (mortal sin: selecting
cases on their values on the dependent variable).
2) The DV should vary a lot. Begin the research with a wide array of cases.
Error variance (that portion of the variance observed in the dependent variable that is a function of
random occurrences and errors in measurement). No measurement is perfect, so a certain amount of
measurement error is almost inevitable.
1) Easy handled statistically.
2) The comparativist has to give greater attention to the selection of cases. If cases are selected
inappropriately or the observations made by the researcher are faulty, there is little or no way
to recover from the errors.
Extraneous variance (one or more variables have a systematic relationship with the DV).
A bigger concern for the comparative researcher, because this is systematic rather than random error.
In comparative research, there are an almost infinite number of opportunities for extraneous variance.
When focusing on whole countries: they all come as data bundles containing a large number of
variables and characteristics. The nation is a permanent cause according to Mill.
One of the first defences against extraneous variance is theory. The comparative method is dependent
upon pre-existing criteria of relevance such as concepts, propositions and theories. A good theory
should help the investigator determine whether the right control variables are being considered.
Second possible defence: use of time-series analysis or using subnational units from within a single
country.
Research Design and Case Selection
We are left with attempting to find the best possible substitute for the rigorous controls provided by
the experimental method. The questions of case selection and research design are presented as the
substitute for not being able to manipulate variables and randomize case assignments. Any non-
experimental design is subject to a number of threats to validity.
The principal issue: how to cope with this problem through the more direct means of research design
and case selection. How many cases (next chapter) and which ones. Ex ante selection of cases
(comparative method) vs. ex post manipulation of data (statistical design).
What makes cases comparable?
5

Either focus of comparison explaining similarities or differences can tell the researcher a great
deal about the way in which governments function
Most similar and most different systems designs
How to select the cases for comparative analysis given that most comparative work does involve
purposeful rather than random selection of the cases?
Ex: Skocpol MDSD when studying revolutions in France, Russia and China. What was sufficiently
common among those systems to produce events that were essentially similar?
MSSD: the usual method, also called parallel demonstration of theory. The assumption is that
extraneous variance questions have been dealt with by the selection of cases (study of Scandinavian
countries, of Asian little tigers etc.). But any variable that does differentiate the systems is likely to be
the source of the observed variation among them. Other competitors would be equally plausible.
Over-determination
MDSD starts with the assumption that the phenomenon being explained resides at a lower, sub-
systemic level. It attempts to determine how robust any relationship among the variables may be
does it hold up in a large number of varied places? The basic logic here is falsification. It eliminates
plausible causes for that phenomenon. It deals with the control issue by virtually ignoring it.
Globalisation and Galtons Problem
Other difficulties arise from the increasing globalisation of culture and politics. What we observe in
one country may not be the result of any indigenous political process, but rather may be a product of
diffusion. In the social sciences, this problem is usually referred to as Galtons problem: the
methodological problem of sorting out diffusion from other causes of variance in the social systems.
Ex: prevalence of presidential forms of government in Latin American countries. But countries are not
passive receivers of traits what we can do is thus to attempt to understand diffusion processes
better. Diffusion is a fact of political and social life, but it can confound our comprehension of
causation in comparative analysis.

Levels of analysis
Very easy to slip into fallacious reasoning that attributes the properties discovered at one level of
analysis to the other level. The ecological fallacy. Common trap: assume that something we call a
country is a homogeneous unit. The individualistic fallacy in which the collectivity is assumed to have
the properties of the individuals that comprise it. The Civic Culture.
Any level of analysis will do well. The problem is simply not to mix the levels. However, cross-level
inference should be regarded as a crucial question in comparative politics.
Whenever we begin an analysis we are cutting into a complex chain of causation [linking individuals
to other individuals, individual to primary group, etc secondary group to organization, organization
to organization and so on].
Threats to validity in Non-experimental research
Internal vs. external validity
6

History
Selection bias: there is a tendency to select the cases that the researcher knows best; attempt to make
theory fit the cases rather than vice-versa.
Instrument bias: the individual researcher
Maturation: individuals and groups do change over time and those changes can affect the validity of
findings.
Regression towards the mean

Conclusion
Comparative political analysis is heavily dependent upon the cases selected for analysis. A researcher
should be able to justify the choice of cases on theoretical grounds rather than on convenience
grounds.
It maybe that the purpose of the research is not so much to find the cause of a particular phenomenon,
but rather is more exploratory, looking at an interesting phenomenon and attempting to understand
better something of its nature.
We tend to focus attention on the uses of comparative research for theory testing and falsification and
often forget that there are more exploratory uses that are equally valid.

You might also like