Lecture3DesignLogic.docVIP

北京师范大学 教育研究中的比较―历史方法 Lecture 3 The Design and Logics of Comparative-Historical Method in the Social Sciences A. The Essentials of Comparative Studies 1. “We have only one means of demonstrating that one phenomenon is the cause of another: it is to compare case the cases where they are simultaneously present or absent. When the phenomenon can be artificially produced by the observer, the method is experimentation in its proper sense. When, on the contrary, the product of fact is out of reach, when we can thus only bring them together as they are spontaneously produced, the method we use is that of indirect experimentation, or comparative method.” (Durkhiem; Quoted in Dogan and Pelassy, 1990, P. 15-16) 2 “Comparison is a universal method in the social sciences; it is worthwhile not only to those who study in international field. ….It is not surprise that the historical method is so often combined with comparative method.” (Dogan and Pelassy, 1990, P. 16) 3. “Comparative sociology is not a special branch of sociology, it is sociology itself, in so far as it cease to be purely descriptive and aspires to account for fact.” (Durkhiem, P. 157; Quoted in Schriewer, 2003, P. 5) B. The Basic Principles of Research Design of Comparative Research Morris Zelditch (1971) specifies that the design of comparative research is conditioned largely by four rules: 1. Comparability : Two or more instances of a phenomenon may be compared if and only if there exists some variable, say V, common to each instance. 2. J.S. Mills 1st Canon (Method of Agreement) : No second variable, say U, is the cause or effect of V, if it is not found when V is found. 3. J.S. Mills 2nd Canon (Method of Difference): No second variables U is the cause or effect of V if it is found when V is not. 4. Rule of One Variable : No second variable U is definitely the cause or effect of V if there exists a third variable, w, that is present or absent in the same circumstances as U. C. Charles Ragin’s Boo