IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v51y2022i2p541-565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Critical Tension: Sufficiency and Parsimony in QCA

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian DuÈ™a

Abstract

The main objective of the qualitative comparative analysis is to find solutions that display sufficient configurations of causal conditions leading to the presence of an outcome. These solutions should be less complex than the original observed configurations, as parsimonious as possible, without sacrificing the sufficiency requirement. Sufficiency and parsimony are two requirements that act in opposition, and an optimal solution is one that accommodates both. There are different search strategies that lead to different types of solutions, with an ongoing debate about which solution type is closest to the true, underlying causal structure. This article presents the different logics behind each simplification system in order to explain how and why they lead to different results and introduces the concept of “robust sufficiency†to clear the debate. It analyses the correctness ratios for the different solution type and provides an improved set of procedures to measure correctness that captures the best features from each system. Out of the competition between the conservative and the parsimonious search strategies, the intermediate solution emerges as the best hybrid that is suitable for causal analysis, outperforming the parsimonious solution in recovering a known (even parsimonious) causal structure.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian DuÈ™a, 2022. "Critical Tension: Sufficiency and Parsimony in QCA," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 541-565, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:51:y:2022:i:2:p:541-565
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124119882456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124119882456
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124119882456?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. Hug, Simon, 2013. "Qualitative Comparative Analysis: How Inductive Use and Measurement Error Lead to Problematic Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 252-265, April.
    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. Wise, Ramsey, 2015. "Does market-oriented education systems improve performance or increase inequality: A configurational comparative method for understanding (un)intended educational outcomes," TranState Working Papers 189, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    2. Yonghua Zhang & Xue Wang & Shenwei Wan & Hongge Zhu, 2023. "Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of the Factors Affecting Satisfaction with the Policy of Ecological Forest Rangers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Martyna Daria Swiatczak, 2022. "Different algorithms, different models," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1913-1937, August.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Eva Thomann & Martino Maggetti, 2020. "Designing Research With Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA): Approaches, Challenges, and Tools," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(2), pages 356-386, May.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Blair, Graeme & Cooper, Jasper & Coppock, Alexander & Humphreys, Macartan, 2019. "Declaring and Diagnosing Research Designs," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 113(3), pages 838-859.

    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:51:y:2022:i:2:p:541-565. 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.