The Comparative Advantages of fsQCA and Regression Analysis for Moderately Large-N Analyses

Barbara Vis

Sociological Methods & Research · 2012 · 452 citations · 40 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Moderately large‑n studies (≈50–100) enable both regression and fsQCA, which rest on distinct epistemological foundations and address related research questions. The article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of regression analysis versus fsQCA for moderately large‑n social science studies. The comparison is illustrated using a dataset of 53 Western democracies on conditions that drive increased spending on active labor market policies. The study finds that fsQCA provides a fuller understanding of the conditions leading to increased active labor market policy spending than regression analysis.

Abstract

This article contributes to the literature on comparative methods in the social sciences by assessing the strengths and weaknesses of regression analysis and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) for studies with a moderately large-n (between approximately 50 and 100). Moderately large-n studies are interesting in this respect since they allow for regression analysis as well as fsQCA analysis. These two approaches have a different epistemological foundation and thereby answer different, yet related, research questions. To illustrate the comparison of fsQCA and regression analysis empirically, I use a recent data set ( n = 53) that includes data on the conditions under which governments in Western democracies increase their spending on active labor market policies (ALMPs). This comparison demonstrates that while each approach has merits and demerits, fsQCA leads to a fuller understanding of the conditions under which the outcome occurs.

References

40