IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v45y2016i3p493-525.html

The Case for Selecting Cases That Are Deviant or Extreme on the Independent Variable

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Seawright

Abstract

Qualitative and multimethod scholars face a wide and often confusing array of alternatives for case selection using the results of a prior regression analysis. Methodologists have recommended alternatives including selection of typical cases, deviant cases, extreme cases on the independent variable, extreme cases on the dependent variable, influential cases, most similar cases, most different cases, pathway cases, and randomly sampled cases, among others. Yet this literature leaves it substantially unclear which of these approaches is best for any particular goal. Via statistical modeling and simulation, I argue that the rarely considered approach of selecting cases with extreme values on the main independent variable, as well as the more commonly discussed deviant case design, are the best alternatives for a broad range of discovery-related goals. By contrast, the widely discussed and advocated typical case, extreme-on- Y , and most similar cases approaches to case selection are much less valuable than scholars in the qualitative and multimethods research traditions have recognized to date.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Seawright, 2016. "The Case for Selecting Cases That Are Deviant or Extreme on the Independent Variable," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(3), pages 493-525, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:3:p:493-525
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124116643556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124116643556
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124116643556?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. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107698000, November.
    2. Baccini, Leonardo & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2014. "International institutions and domestic politics: can preferential trading agreements help leaders promote economic reform?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 55608, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Dunning,Thad, 2012. "Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107017665, November.
    4. Gerring, John, 2004. "What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 341-354, May.
    5. Ziblatt, Daniel, 2009. "Shaping Democratic Practice and the Causes of Electoral Fraud: The Case of Nineteenth-Century Germany," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(1), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Kreuzer, Marcus, 2010. "Historical Knowledge and Quantitative Analysis: The Case of the Origins of Proportional Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 369-392, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mathias, Blake D. & Solomon, Shelby J. & Madison, Kristen, 2017. "After the harvest: A stewardship perspective on entrepreneurship and philanthropy," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 385-404.

    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. Richard A. Nielsen, 2016. "Case Selection via Matching," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(3), pages 569-597, August.
    2. David A. Bateman & Dawn Langan Teele, 2020. "A developmental approach to historical causal inference," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 253-279, December.
    3. Parker Hevron, 2018. "Judicialization and Its Effects: Experiments as a Way Forward," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Peter John, 2018. "Theories of policy change and variation reconsidered: a prospectus for the political economy of public policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(1), pages 1-16, March.
    5. Reeves, Aaron & Fransham, Mark & Stewart, Kitty & Reader, Mary & Patrick, Ruth, 2024. "Capping welfare payments for workless families increases employment and economic inactivity: evidence from the UK's benefit cap," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122338, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Robert F. Kane & Ching-Yang Lin, 2019. "Up(and down)-skilling and directed technical change," Working Papers EMS_2019_03, Research Institute, International University of Japan.
    7. Frye, Timothy & Borisova, Ekaterina, 2016. "Elections, protest and trust in government: A natural experiment from Russia," BOFIT Discussion Papers 9/2016, Bank of Finland Institute for Emerging Economies (BOFIT).
    8. Martínez Alcalá, Samuel & Zanette, Damián H., 2022. "Kinship networks in shrinking and growing populations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 588(C).
    9. Sun, Guibo & Du, Yao, 2023. "New metro and subjective wellbeing among older people: A natural experiment in Hong Kong," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    10. Aaron Reeves & Martin McKee & Johan Mackenbach & Margaret Whitehead & David Stuckler, 2017. "Introduction of a National Minimum Wage Reduced Depressive Symptoms in Low‐Wage Workers: A Quasi‐Natural Experiment in the UK," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(5), pages 639-655, May.
    11. Baldwin, Kate & Bhavnani, Rikhil R., 2013. "Ancillary Experiments: Opportunities and Challenges," WIDER Working Paper Series 024, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Song, Shige, 2014. "Evidence of adaptive intergenerational sex ratio adjustment in contemporary human populations," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 14-21.
    13. Thomas R. Dyckman & Stephen A. Zeff, 2019. "Important Issues in Statistical Testing and Recommended Improvements in Accounting Research," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-11, May.
    14. Grüner Sven, 2020. "Sample Size Calculation in Economic Experiments," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 240(6), pages 791-823, December.
    15. Youwei Wang & Yuxin Chen & Yi Qian, 2018. "The Causal Link between Relative Age Effect and Entrepreneurship: Evidence from 17 Million Users across 49 Years on Taobao," NBER Working Papers 25318, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Peter J. Buckley, 2016. "Historical Research Approaches to the Analysis of Internationalisation," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 879-900, December.
    17. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1176-1207 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Haoge Chang & Joel Middleton & P. M. Aronow, 2021. "Exact Bias Correction for Linear Adjustment of Randomized Controlled Trials," Papers 2110.08425, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    19. Luke N. Condra & Michael Callen & Radha K. Iyengar & James D. Long & Jacob N. Shapiro, 2019. "Damaging democracy? Security provision and turnout in Afghan elections†," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 163-193, July.
    20. Panos Sousounis & Gauthier Lanot, 2022. "Minimum Wage Effects on Reservation Wages," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 415-439, December.
    21. Oded Galor & Ömer Özak, 2016. "The Agricultural Origins of Time Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 3064-3103, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:3:p:493-525. 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.