The problem of case selection is a crucial but often overlooked issue in comparative cross-national research. The article discusses methodological shortcomings and potential solutions in selecting cases. All comparative research of social entities, whether quantitative or qualitative, faces the problem of contingency, the fact that the potential pool of cases has been pre-selected by historical and political processes. In large-N cross-national studies the use of inference statistics is problematic since random selection is rarely given and the cases represent a highly stratified set. In small-N case studies, however, the selection of cases is a deliberate choice based on the theory-driven comparative method. The epistemological and methodological problems of both comparative approaches are discussed and evaluated.
Arthur, W. B. (1994) Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press .
2.
Beck, N. (2001) ‘Time-Series-Cross-Section Data: What Have We Learned in the Past Few Years?’ , Annual Review of Political Science4: 271-293 .
3.
Berg-Schlosser, D. and De Meur, G. (1994) ‘Comparing Political Systems: Establishing Similarities and Dissimilarities’ , European Journal of Political Research26: 193-219 .
4.
Brady, H. E. and Collier, D. , eds (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield .
5.
Braumoeller, B. F. and Goertz, G. (2000) ‘The Methodology of Necessary Conditions’ , American Journal of Political Science44(4): 844-858 .
6.
Collier, D. (1991) ‘The Comparative Method: Two Decades of Change’, in D. A. Rustow and K. P. Erickson (eds) Comparative Political Dynamics: Global Research Perspectives, pp. 7-31. New York: Harper Collins .
7.
Dion, D. (1998) ‘Evidence and Inference in the Comparative Case Study’ , Comparative Politics30: 127-145 .
8.
Ebbinghaus, B. (1998) ‘Europe Through the Looking-Glass: Comparison and Multi-Level Perspectives’ , Acta Sociologica41(4): 301-313 .
9.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
10.
Fearon, J. D. and Laitin, D. (2003) ‘Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War’ , American Political Science Review97(1): 75-90 .
11.
Geddes, B. (1990) ‘How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics’, in J. Stimson (ed.) Political Analysis, pp. 131-150. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press .
12.
Gerring, J. (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Critical Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
13.
Goldthorpe, J. H. (1997) ‘Current Issues in Comparative Macrosociology: A Debate on Methodological Issues’ , Comparative Social Research16: 1-26 .
14.
Heckman, J. J. (1979) ‘Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error’ , Econometrica47(1): 153-162 .
15.
Janoski, T. and Issac, L. W. (1994) ‘Introduction to Time-series Analysis’, in T. Janoski and A. M. Hicks (eds) The Comparative Political Economy of the Welfare State, pp. 31-53. New York: Cambridge University .
16.
Katzenstein, P. J. (1985) Small States in World Markets. Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press .
17.
King, G. , Keohane, R. O. and Verba, S. (1994) Designing Social Inquiry. Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
18.
Kittel, B. (1999) ‘Sense and Sensitivity in Pooled Analysis of Political Data’ , European Journal of Political Research35: 225-253 .
19.
Kohl, J. (2002) ‘Armut und Armutsforschung in der Europäischen Union’, in W. Glatzer , R. Habich and K. U. Mayer (eds) Sozialer Wandel und gesellschaftliche Dauerbeobachtung, pp. 163-179. Opladen: Leske und Budrich .
20.
Kohli, A. , Evans, P. B. , Katzenstein, P. J. , Przeworski, A. , Rudolph, S. H. , Scott, J. C. and Skocpol, T. (1995) ‘The Role of Theory in Comparative Politics. A Symposium’ , World Politics48: 1-49 .
21.
Kvist, J. (1999) ‘Welfare Reform in the Nordic Countries in the 1990s: Using Fuzzy-Set Theory to Access Conformity to Ideal Types’ , Journal of European Social Policy9(3): 231-252 .
22.
Lieberson, S. (1985) Making It Count: The Improvement of Social Research and Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press .
23.
Lieberson, S. (1991) ‘Small N’s and Big Conclusions: An Examination of the Reasoning in Comparative Studies Based on Small Number of Cases’ , Social Forces70(2): 307-320 .
24.
Lieberson, S. (1994) ‘More on the Uneasy Case for Using Mill-Type Methods in Small N Comparative Studies’ , Social Forces72(4): 1225-1237 .
25.
Lijphart, A. (1971) ‘Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method’ , American Political Science Review65: 682-693 .
26.
Mahoney, J. (2000) ‘Strategies of Causal Inference in Small-N Analysis’ , Sociological Methods and Research28(4): 387-424 .
27.
Mahoney, J. (2003) ‘Strategies of Causal Assessment in Comparative Historical aAnalysis’, in J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer (eds) Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, pp. 337-372. New York: Cambridge University Press .
28.
Mahoney, J. and Rueschemeyer, D. , eds (2003) Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press .
29.
Myles, J. and Pierson, P. (2001) ‘The Comparative Political Economy of Pension Reform’, in P. Pierson (ed.) The New Politics of the Welfare State, pp. 305-333. New York: Oxford University Press .
30.
Nichols, E. (1986) ‘Skocpol on Revolution: Comparative Analysis vs Historica Conjuncture’ , Comparative Social Research9: 163-186 .
31.
Obinger, H. and Kittel, B. (2003) ‘Parteien, Institutitionen und Wohlfahrtsstaat: Politisch-institutionelle Determinanten der Sozialpolitik in OECD-Ländern’, in H. Obinger , U. Wagschal and B. Kittel (eds) Politische Ökonomie, pp. 355-384. Opladen: Leske und Budrich .
32.
Pennings, P. , Keman, H. and Kleinnijenhuis, J. (1999) Doing Research in Political Science: An Introduction to Comparative Methods and Statistics. London: Sage .
33.
Pierson, P. (2000) ‘Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics’ , American Political Science Review94(2): 251-267 .
34.
Przeworski, A. and Teune, H. (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley .
35.
Przeworski, A. , Alvarez, E. M. , Cheibub, J. A. and Limongi, F. (2000) Democracy and Development. Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950-1990. New York: Cambridge University Press .
36.
Ragin, C. C. (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press .
37.
Ragin, C. C. (2000) Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press .
38.
Rokkan, S. (1999) State Formation, Nation-Building and Mass Politics in Europe. The Theory of Stein Rokkan. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
39.
Savolainen, J. (1994) ‘The Rationality of Drawing Big Conclusions Based on Small Samples in Defense of Mill’s Methods’ , Social Forces72(4): 1217-1224 .
40.
Skocpol, T. (1979) States and Social Revolutions. A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
41.
Skocpol, T. (1986) ‘Analyzing Causal Configurations in History: A Rejoinder to Nichols’ , Comparative Social Research9: 187-194 .
42.
Smelser, N. J. (2003) ‘On Comparative Analysis, Interdisciplinarity and Internationalization in Sociology’ , International Sociology18(4): 643-657 .
43.
Tilly, C. (1975) ‘Reflections on the History of European-State Making’, in C. Tilly (ed.) The Formation of National States in Western Europe, pp. 3-83. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
