Political Preferences of QCA Methods Institutes? A Comment on the Availability and Gender Gap Disparity Problems
Abstract
In this research note, I examine a set of two interrelated questions about the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) methods institutes. First, I assembled and analyzed a novel dataset that tracks every QCA related training worldwide from 2002 to 2018. My examination finds that although QCA trainings are becoming more popular in Europe, the US is still the single most frequent host country for such events. Secondly, I examine the extent to which gender gap exists among QCA instructors. My findings show that female QCA instructors are severely under-represented, which likely limits their academic and professional opportunities. Thus, the QCA research community appears to be marked by the same structural challenges to diversity and gender equality as other areas of political science. Overall, this paper should of interest to scholars interested in the impact of academic infrastructures on future research trajectories as well as those concerned about gender equality in academia.
Keywords
QCA; methods institutes; gender gap
References
Barnes, T. D., & Beaulieu, E. (2017). Engaging Women: Addressing the Gender Gap in Women’s Networking and Productivity. 50(2), 461–466. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096516003000
Beaulieu, E., Boydstun, A. E., Brown, N. E., Dionne, K. Y., Gillespie, A., Klar, S., Krupnikov, Y., Michelson, M. R., Searles, K., & Wolbrecht, C. (2017). Women Also Know Stuff: Meta-Level Mentoring to Battle Gender Bias in Political Science. 50(3), 779–783. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096517000580
Bennett, A., & Elman, C. (2007). Qualitative Methods: The View From the Subfields. Comparative Political Studies, 40(2), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414006296344
Collier, D., & Elman, C. (2010). Qualitative and Multimethod Research: Organizations, Publications, and Reflections on Integration. In J. M. Box-Steffensmeier, H. E. Brady, & D. Collier (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology (pp. 780–795). Oxford University Press.
Emmons, C. V., & Moravcsik, A. M. (2019). Graduate Qualitative Methods Training in Political Science: A Disciplinary Crisis. PS: Political Science & Politics, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096519001719
Eszter Simon. (2013). Teaching Political Science Research Methods in Hungary: Transferring Student-Centred Teaching Practices into a Subject-Focused Academic Culture. European Political Science, 13(1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2013.43
Fonseca, E. M. D., & Segatto, C. (2019). Teaching Qualitative Research Methods in Political Science: Does One Size Fits All? Journal of Political Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2019.1656081
Gill, A. J. (1998). Rendering unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and the State in Latin America. University of Chicago Press.
Goertz, G., & Mahoney, J. (2012). A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton University Press.
Henehan, M. T., & Sarkees, M. R. (2009). Open Doors and Closed Ceilings: Gender‐Based Patterns and Attitudes in the International Studies Association. International Studies Perspectives, 10(4), 428–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2009.00387.x
Kettell, S. (2012). Has Political Science Ignored Religion? PS: Political Science & Politics, 45(1), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096511001752
Marx, A., Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. (2014). The Origins, Development, and Application of Qualitative Comparative Analysis: The First 25 years. 6(1), 115–142. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773912000318
Mershon, C., & Walsh, D. (2015). How Political Science Can Be More Diverse. PS: Political Science & Politics, 48(3), 441–444. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096515000207
Moravcsik, A. (2010). Active Citation: A Precondition for Replicable Qualitative Research. PS: Political Science & Politics, 43(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096510990781
Paine, J. (2016). Set-Theoretic Comparative Methods: Less Distinctive Than Claimed. Comparative Political Studies, 49(6), 703–741. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414014564851
Ragin, C. C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of California.
Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-Set Social Science. University of Chicago Press.
Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. University of Chicago Press.
Reid, R. A., & Curry, T. A. (2019). Are We There Yet? Addressing Diversity in Political Science Subfields. PS: Political Science & Politics, 52(2), 281–286. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096518002068
Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Schwartz-Shea, P. (2003). Is This the Curriculum We Want? Doctoral Requirements and Offerings in Methods and Methodology. PS: Political Science & Politics, 36(3), 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1017.S1049096503002488
Seawright, J. (2016). Multi-Method Social Science: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Tools. Cambridge University Press.
Sekara, V., Deville, P., Ahnert, S., Sinatra, R., & Lehmann, S. (2018). The Chaperone Effect in Scientific Publishing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(50), 12603–12607. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1800471115
Sinclair-Chapman, V. (2015). Leveraging Diversity in Political Science for Institutional and Disciplinary Change. PS: Political Science & Politics, 48(3), 454–458. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096515000232
Tatarczyk, D. (2018). The Reshaping of the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide: A Case of QCA. Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, Fall 16(2), 44-52. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3524376
Albion College United States
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4042-7562
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Owners of the submitted texts grant the Reader the right to use the pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution-Share-Alike (CC BY-SA). The user can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose.
1. License
The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.
If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".
ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).
3. User Rights
Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
4. Co-Authorship
If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.
