IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v33y2005i4p497-538.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Two-Level Theories and Fuzzy-Set Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Goertz

    (University of Arizona)

  • James Mahoney

    (Brown University)

Abstract

Two-level theories explain outcomes with causal variables at two levels of analysis that are systematically related to one another. Although many prominent scholars in the field of comparative analysis have developed two-level theories, the empirical and methodological issues that these theories raise have yet to be investigated. In this article, the authors explore different structures of two-level theories and consider the issues involved in testing these theories with fuzzy-set methods. They show that grasping the overall structure of two-level theories requires both specifying the particular type of relationship that exists between and within levels of analysis and specifying the logical linkages between levels in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. They argue that for the purposes of testing these theories, fuzzy-set analysis provides a powerful set of tools. However, to realize this potential, investigators using fuzzy-set methods must be clear about the two-level structure of their theories from the onset.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Goertz & James Mahoney, 2005. "Two-Level Theories and Fuzzy-Set Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 33(4), pages 497-538, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:33:y:2005:i:4:p:497-538
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124104266128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124104266128
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124104266128?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mahoney, James & Goertz, Gary, 2004. "The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Comparative Research," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 653-669, November.
    2. Sartori, Giovanni, 1970. "Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1033-1053, December.
    3. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773, September.
    4. Braumoeller, Bear F., 2003. "Causal Complexity and the Study of Politics," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 209-233, July.
    5. Collier, David & Mahon, James E., 1993. "Conceptual “Stretching†Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(4), pages 845-855, December.
    6. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    2. Barbara Vis, 2012. "The Comparative Advantages of fsQCA and Regression Analysis for Moderately Large-N Analyses," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(1), pages 168-198, February.
    3. Michener, Gregory, 2015. "Policy Evaluation via Composite Indexes: Qualitative Lessons from International Transparency Policy Indexes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 184-196.
    4. Eelco van der Maat, 2021. "Simplified complexity: Analytical strategies for conflict event research," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 87-108, January.
    5. Jaap Woldendorp & Hans Keman, 2010. "Dynamic institutional analysis: measuring corporatist intermediation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 259-275, February.
    6. David Bedford & Mikko Sandelin, 2015. "Investigating management control configurations using qualitative comparative analysis: an overview and guidelines for application," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 5-26, April.
    7. Giovanni Capoccia, 2002. "Anti-System Parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 9-35, January.
    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. Thomas Rixen & Lora Anne Viola, 2015. "Putting path dependence in its place: toward a Taxonomy of institutional change," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 301-323, April.
    10. Sophia Lee, 2013. "Fuzzy-set method in comparative social policy: a critical introduction and review of the applications of the fuzzy-set method," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1905-1922, June.
    11. Jack S. Levy, 2008. "Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 25(1), pages 1-18, February.
    12. Kendra Koivu & Erin Damman, 2015. "Qualitative variations: the sources of divergent qualitative methodological approaches," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2617-2632, November.
    13. Nair, Lakshmi Balachandran & Gibbert, Michael, 2016. "Analyzing inconsistent cases in Management fsQCA studies: A methodological manifesto," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 1464-1470.
    14. Matthijs Bogaards, 2000. "The Uneasy Relationship between Empirical and Normative Types in Consociational Theory," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 12(4), pages 395-423, October.
    15. Gong, Cheng & Ribiere, Vincent, 2021. "Developing a unified definition of digital transformation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    16. Matthew M. C. Allen & Geoffrey Wood & Mehmet Demirbag, 2022. "Developing theoretically informed typologies in international business: Why we need them, and how to do it," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(9), pages 2133-2146, December.
    17. Rodrigo Barrenechea & Isabel Castillo, 2019. "The many roads to Rome: family resemblance concepts in the social sciences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 107-130, January.
    18. Hage, Frank M., 2007. "Constructivism, fuzzy sets and (very) small-N: Revisiting the conditions for communicative action," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(5), pages 512-521, May.
    19. Jørgen Møller & Svend-Erik Skaaning, 2017. "Explanatory Typologies as a Nested Strategy of Inquiry: Combining Cross-case and Within-case Analyses," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(4), pages 1018-1048, November.
    20. John Gerring & Paul A. Barresi, 2003. "Putting Ordinary Language to Work," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(2), pages 201-232, April.

    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:sae:somere:v:33:y:2005:i:4:p:497-538. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.