IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/polals/v23y2015i01p21-41_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fuzzy Sets on Shaky Ground: Parameter Sensitivity and Confirmation Bias in fsQCA

Author

Listed:
  • Krogslund, Chris
  • Choi, Donghyun Danny
  • Poertner, Mathias

Abstract

Scholars have increasingly turned to fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to conduct small- and medium-N studies, arguing that it combines the most desired elements of variable-oriented and case-oriented research. This article demonstrates, however, that fsQCA is an extraordinarily sensitive method whose results are worryingly susceptible to minor parametric and model specification changes. We make two specific claims. First, the causal conditions identified by fsQCA as being sufficient for an outcome to occur are highly contingent upon the values of several key parameters selected by the user. Second, fsQCA results are subject to marked confirmation bias. Given its tendency toward finding complex connections between variables, the method is highly likely to identify as sufficient for an outcome causal combinations containing even randomly generated variables. To support these arguments, we replicate three articles utilizing fsQCA and conduct sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulations to assess the impact of small changes in parameter values and the method's built-in confirmation bias on the overall conclusions about sufficient conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Krogslund, Chris & Choi, Donghyun Danny & Poertner, Mathias, 2015. "Fuzzy Sets on Shaky Ground: Parameter Sensitivity and Confirmation Bias in fsQCA," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 21-41, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:23:y:2015:i:01:p:21-41_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S104719870001158X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matheus Koengkan & Nuno Silva & José Alberto Fuinhas, 2023. "Assessing Energy Performance Certificates for Buildings: A Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of Portuguese Municipalities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-30, April.
    2. Del Sarto, Nicola & Isabelle, Diane A. & Di Minin, Alberto, 2020. "The role of accelerators in firm survival: An fsQCA analysis of Italian startups," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    3. Prosman, Ernst Johannes & Cagliano, Raffaella, 2022. "A contingency perspective on manufacturing configurations for the circular economy: Insights from successful start-ups," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    4. Martyna Daria Swiatczak, 2022. "Different algorithms, different models," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1913-1937, August.
    5. Alrik Thiem, 2022. "Beyond the Facts: Limited Empirical Diversity and Causal Inference in Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 527-540, May.
    6. Wagemann, Claudius & Buche, Jonas & Siewert, Markus B., 2016. "QCA and business research: Work in progress or a consolidated agenda?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2531-2540.
    7. Erzurumlu, S. Sinan & Erzurumlu, Yaman O. & Yoon, YongKi, 2022. "National innovation systems and dynamic impact of institutional structures on national innovation capability: A configurational approach with the OKID method," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Victoria Finn, 2022. "A qualitative assessment of QCA: method stretching in large-N studies and temporality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 3815-3830, October.
    9. Fumeng Li & Jiancheng Long & Wu Zhao, 2022. "Mining Braces of Innovation Linking to Digital Transformation Grounded in TOE Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    10. Luis Porcuna-Enguix & Elisabeth Bustos-Contell & José Serrano-Madrid & Gregorio Labatut-Serer, 2021. "Constructing the Audit Risk Assessment by the Audit Team Leader When Planning: Using Fuzzy Theory," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(23), pages 1-22, November.
    11. Xiyuan Yu & Wenli Liu & Lingli Qing & Di Zhang, 2023. "Improving Farm Cooperatives’ Performance and Sustainability: A Study of Agricultural Managers’ Competencies Based on the Grounded Theory and the fsQCA Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Bear F. Braumoeller, 2017. "Aggregation Bias and the Analysis of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions in fsQCA," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(2), pages 242-251, March.
    13. Kopplin, Cristopher Siegfried & Rösch, Stella Franca, 2021. "Equifinal causes of sustainable clothing purchase behavior: An fsQCA analysis among generation Y," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    14. Fredrich, Viktor & Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Tiberius, Victor, 2022. "Dyadic business model convergence or divergence in alliances? – A configurational approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 300-308.
    15. Douglas, Evan J. & Shepherd, Dean A. & Prentice, Catherine, 2020. "Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis for a finer-grained understanding of entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(1).
    16. Barbara Vis & Jan Dul, 2018. "Analyzing Relationships of Necessity Not Just in Kind But Also in Degree," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 47(4), pages 872-899, November.
    17. Michael Baumgartner & Alrik Thiem, 2020. "Often Trusted but Never (Properly) Tested: Evaluating Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(2), pages 279-311, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:23:y:2015:i:01:p:21-41_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.