More On Case Studies: Kåre Vernby

More on Case Studies
Kåre Vernby
Kåre Vernby (Uppsala universitet) More on Case Studies November 11, 2013 1 / 19
Lecture Outline
The Experimental Template

Process-Tracing
Recall Gerring’s (2012) his minimal definition of a causal argument:

“To say that a factor, X , is a cause of an outcome, Y , is to
say that a change in X generates a change in Y relative to
what Y would otherwise be, given certain background
conditions (ceteris paribus assumptions).”
Suppose we wish to evaluate a statement of this type

We wish to know whether X is really a cause of an outcome Y
To this end, Gerring (2007) advances an ‘experimental template’ for
designing case studies
The purpose of this template is dealing with what is sometimes called

the “fundamental problem of causal inference”
Suppose we think of Y and X as events
The event might be a person casting a vote, a person becoming a
terrorist, a nation experiencing economic growth, a nation
democratizing, a nation going to war...
When does X cause Y ?
Answer: When Y would not have happened unless X had happened
If I had taken two aspirins this morning instead one, my
headache would have been gone by now
This amounts to saying that X implies Y AND not-X implies not-Y

We turn to our case to see whether X does indeed imply Y and
whether not-X implies not-Y
Here the fundamental problem of causal inference arises
At a given point in time, our case can only be in one of two states: X
OR not-X
Suppose we observe X and Y , how can we know that not-X would
have been followed by not-Y ?
We cannot re-run history to see whether Y would have still happened

if X didn’t happen (we cannot hold all else equal)
Instead, we will have to approximate this by finding situations that are
as similar as possible but where X happened in some but not in others
Gerring (2007) sketches a number of case-study strategies
These utilize over-time OR spatial variation OR both
Longitudinal comparison: Collect several observations over-time

Suppose you are interested in whether democratization causes growth
and you study the growth rates of a country before democratization
and after democratization
How can this strategy claim to overcome the fundamental problem of
causal inference?
It can’t, of course...
But, the idea is that the country will be similar in many respect
before and after democratization
Notice that it is only those features of a country that are stable or
change very slowly that are held constant in this type of study
Spatial comparison: Collect several observations at one point in time

You study the growth rates of a number of similar countries of which
some have democratized and some have not
The idea is overcoming the fundamental problem by studying
countries that are similar in all important respects except that some
are democracies and some are not
Any difference in growth rates between democracies and
non-democracies is therefore, arguably, to be a consequence of the
regime
Note that we cannot usually know of all the factors that might have
an impact on democracy and growth
There always exist features of countries that we do not manage to
control for
Dynamic comparison: We collect several observations at several

points in time
You study the growth rates of a number of similar countries over a
certain period time
During this period, some countries go through a process of
democratization and some do not
Using the over-time variation within countries, you can hold constant
those features of a country that are stable or change very slowly
Using the variation across countries, you can control for some factors
that are not very stable, but that might affect growth in the countries
you study
In sum, the point of the experimental template is to approximate the

re-run of history
We do this by using variation over time or across space
The well-constructed dynamic comparison is the gold standard here
It comes closest to approximating the re-run of history
...but it is far from perfect
Process Tracing
For this reason, Gerring (2007) argues, we need other forms of

evidence
These forms of evidence are not those that establish covariation, or
causal effects, in the manner of a case study following the
experimental template
Instead, others sorts of evidence that might have bearing on the
hypothesis under study, but hat are not about co-variation, fall under
the rubric of process tracing
The name comes from the idea that one attempts to study the causal
process of interest
Process Tracing
The two main reasons one might want to do a process trace:

First, although one might strive to design a case study such that it
conforms to the experimental template, one can never claim that all
else is really equal
There are almost always some things that are not held constant
To enhance the credibility of one’s causal claim or explanation, one
instead looks for causal mechanisms
Second, even if one succeeds in holding all relevant factors constant,
one may want to provide a causal mechanism
Going from making a causal statement to providing a causal
explanation
Process Tracing
But how does one implement a good analysis of a causal mechanism?

Hedström and Swedberg (1996) offer the following answer
Instead, we should look for “social mechanisms underlying a range of
different social processes”
The idea is that when we explain a particular case or event with the
help of general social mechanism, it lends credibility to our specific
explanation
Using Elster’s (2007) terminology, we would say that our particular
explanation is then supported from above
A explanation is supported from above if it can “be deduced from a
more general theory”
Process Tracing
An example:
Outcome to be explained: An actor runs for a political office.
During the campaign she raises campaign funds but instead of using
them all, she saves a substantial share of these funds
Proposed Explanation: By saving a substantial share of her funds
she is ensuring that, if she wins office, her re-election campaign will
be very well funded, thereby deterring challengers to enter the next
electoral race
Can we say that this explanation is supported from above?
Process Tracing
Yes, we could say that this explanation is an example of the more

general social mechanism of deterrence
General mechanism: Deterrence is the behavior observed when an
agent tries to convince another agent not to carry out some action by
increasing the costs or losses associated with that action
By accumulating a large amount of resources and saving a lot of
them for the next campaign, she is ensuring that it will be more costly
for a candidate to challenge her
The more resources she has, the more resources a challengers has to
spend to beat her in the next race
Process Tracing
To many of you, it is more familiar to think of deterrence in the

context of international security
A military buildup by a nation can be seen as an attempt to deter
foreign powers from military action
For instance, the Swedish military buildup during the cold war ensured
that it would be costly to attack Sweden
It is perhaps no coincidence that a candidate’s campaign funds are
often referred to as her “war chest”?
Process Tracing
General social mechanisms can also help us deduce new hypotheses

that explain additional aspects of our case
If these hypotheses are also consistent with the facts of our specific
case, our proposed explanation is supported from below (Elster 2007)
This might be especially motivated when we cannot directly observe
our proposed mechanism
As in our case, when it is hard to empirically observe the intentions of
politicians
Process Tracing
Proposed Explanation: By saving a substantial share of her funds

she is ensuring that, if she wins office, her re-election campaign will
be very well funded, thereby deterring challengers to enter the next
electoral race
We might expect that this behavior will be especially prevalent when
we are studying believes there is a real threat to her re-election
If she is running in a district that almost always goes to candidates
from her party, then our explanation is found wanting
If she is running in a district that almost always goes to candidates
from the other party, our explanation is also found wanting
Process Tracing
What other facts of our particular case could be derived from our
mechanism?
Several, but here are some:
If she is running in a close district, we should expect to see other
candidates saving resources too
We should expect her to cut down on campaign spending during parts
of the race where it looks like she is sure to loose or sure to win
If she wins, we should expect only resource rich candidates to enter
the race (e.g. personal wealth)
These are examples of how one can use the mechanism to support an
explanation from below

More On Case Studies: Kåre Vernby

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

More On Case Studies: Kåre Vernby

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

More on Case Studies

The Experimental Template

Recall Gerring’s (2012) his minimal definition of a causal argument:

Suppose we wish to evaluate a statement of this type

The purpose of this template is dealing with what is sometimes called

This amounts to saying that X implies Y AND not-X implies not-Y

We cannot re-run history to see whether Y would have still happened

Longitudinal comparison: Collect several observations over-time

Spatial comparison: Collect several observations at one point in time

Dynamic comparison: We collect several observations at several

In sum, the point of the experimental template is to approximate the

For this reason, Gerring (2007) argues, we need other forms of

The two main reasons one might want to do a process trace:

But how does one implement a good analysis of a causal mechanism?

Yes, we could say that this explanation is an example of the more

To many of you, it is more familiar to think of deterrence in the

General social mechanisms can also help us deduce new hypotheses

Proposed Explanation: By saving a substantial share of her funds

You might also like