This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Pierson, P. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Costs of Marginalization

Qualitative Methods in the Study of American Politics

University of California, Berkeley

In the past few decades research relying primarily on qualitative methods has been almost completely marginalized within the subfield of American politics. After outlining the unusual organizational contours of the subfield, the author demonstrates that even as it has been marginalized, qualitative work continues to make very important contributions to scholars’ understanding of American politics. Much of the strength of this work comes from its focus on the substance of politics, its configurative approach to explanation, and its attentiveness to the temporal dimensions of social processes. Despite the high quality of much quantitative work in American politics, the marginalization of qualitative approaches has come at a substantial cost, introducing a range of biases and shortcomings in the subfield’s main research programs.

Key Words: qualitative methods • political development • political economy • public policy • process tracing

Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 40, No. 2, 146-169 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0010414006296347


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?