ID | 136451 |
Title Proper | Trust, but verify |
Other Title Information | the transparency revolution and qualitative international relations |
Language | ENG |
Author | Moravcsik, Andrew |
Summary / Abstract (Note) | Qualitative analysis is the most important empirical method in the field of international relations (IR). More than 70 percent of all IR scholars conduct primarily qualitative research (including narrative case studies, traditional history, small-n comparison, counterfactual analysis, process-tracing, analytic narrative, ethnography and thick description, discourse analysis), compared to only 20 percent whose work is primarily quantitative. Total use is even more pervasive, with more than 85 percent of IR scholars conducting some qualitative analysis.1 Qualitative analysis is also unmatched in its flexibility and applicability: a textual record exists for almost every major international event in modern world history. Qualitative research also delivers impressive explanatory insight, rigor, and reliability. Of the twenty scholars judged by their colleagues to have “produced the best work in the field of IR in the past 20 years,” seventeen conduct almost exclusively qualitative research.2 Moreover, controlled studies reveal that experts on world affairs whose analyses are informed by more eclectic theory and the myriad “situational facts of each historical episode” (a mode in which qualitative analysis excels) tend to predict future events significantly better than those who seek to predict future events using average tendencies and abstract theory (hallmarks of formal and quantitative analysis). To borrow Tolstoy's famous metaphor, “foxes” consistently outperform “hedgehogs.”3 No wonder scholars hold a widespread conviction that qualitative analysis is more policy relevant than any other type of IR scholarship. |
`In' analytical Note | Security Studies Vol.23, No.4; Oct-Dec.2014: p.663-688 |
Journal Source | Security Studies Vol: 23 No 4 |
Standard Number | International Relations – IR |