A Pragmatic Guide to Qualitative Historical Analysis in the Study of International Relations

TLDR

Qualitative researchers, especially those using case studies, are increasingly focused on rigorous designs to maximize explanatory power with few cases, yet the use of primary and secondary source material remains underemphasized. The essay examines the challenges political scientists face when using archival or secondary historical sources and proposes guidelines to reduce investigator bias and unwarranted selectivity. It proposes practical guidelines to mitigate investigator bias and unwarranted selectivity in qualitative historical research. The guidelines are intended to help advanced undergraduates and graduate students improve the quality of historically oriented political science scholarship.

Abstract

Researchers using qualitative methods, including case studies and comparative case studies, are becoming more self–conscious in enhancing the rigor of their research designs so as to maximize their explanatory leverage with a small number of cases. One aspect of qualitative research that has not received as much attention is the use of primary and secondary source material as data or evidence. This essay explores the potential problems encountered by political scientists as they conduct archival research or rely on secondary source material produced by historians. The essay also suggests guidelines for researchers to minimize the main problems associated with qualitative historical research, namely, investigator bias and unwarranted selectivity in the use of historical source materials. These guidelines should enable advanced undergraduates and graduate students to enhance the quality of their historically minded political science scholarship.