An Exploration of the Presence of Positive-Results Bias in Qualitative Comparative Analysis

IF 6.5 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS
Ingo Rohlfing
{"title":"An Exploration of the Presence of Positive-Results Bias in Qualitative Comparative Analysis","authors":"Ingo Rohlfing","doi":"10.1177/00491241251357948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The value of negative results for knowledge advancement stands in contrast to the abundance of positive findings found in quantitative research across research fields. There is reason to believe that positive-results bias is also present in studies that use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). This possibility has been neglected so far in work on QCA. This article contributes to the field of meta science and QCA by exploring whether hypothesis-testing QCA articles collectively indicate the presence of positive-results bias. An analysis of consistency scores and comparison of hypotheses and findings reported in QCA articles and PhD theses indicate the presence of biases. The results suggest two implications. First, the interpretation fo findings in a field should take into account that negative results may be underreported. Second, QCA research would benefit from exploring techniques that could be integrated into the research and peer-review process to address positive-results bias.","PeriodicalId":21849,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methods & Research","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methods & Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241251357948","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The value of negative results for knowledge advancement stands in contrast to the abundance of positive findings found in quantitative research across research fields. There is reason to believe that positive-results bias is also present in studies that use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). This possibility has been neglected so far in work on QCA. This article contributes to the field of meta science and QCA by exploring whether hypothesis-testing QCA articles collectively indicate the presence of positive-results bias. An analysis of consistency scores and comparison of hypotheses and findings reported in QCA articles and PhD theses indicate the presence of biases. The results suggest two implications. First, the interpretation fo findings in a field should take into account that negative results may be underreported. Second, QCA research would benefit from exploring techniques that could be integrated into the research and peer-review process to address positive-results bias.
定性比较分析中正结果偏倚存在的探讨
消极结果对知识进步的价值与在各个研究领域的定量研究中发现的大量积极结果形成鲜明对比。有理由相信,在使用定性比较分析(QCA)的研究中也存在阳性结果偏差。到目前为止,这种可能性在QCA的工作中被忽视了。本文通过探讨假设检验的QCA文章是否集体表明正结果偏差的存在,为元科学和QCA领域做出了贡献。对一致性分数的分析以及对QCA文章和博士论文中报告的假设和发现的比较表明存在偏差。研究结果暗示了两个含义。首先,对某一领域发现的解释应考虑到负面结果可能被低估。其次,QCA研究将受益于探索可以整合到研究和同行评审过程中的技术,以解决积极结果偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Sociological Methods & Research is a quarterly journal devoted to sociology as a cumulative empirical science. The objectives of SMR are multiple, but emphasis is placed on articles that advance the understanding of the field through systematic presentations that clarify methodological problems and assist in ordering the known facts in an area. Review articles will be published, particularly those that emphasize a critical analysis of the status of the arts, but original presentations that are broadly based and provide new research will also be published. Intrinsically, SMR is viewed as substantive journal but one that is highly focused on the assessment of the scientific status of sociology. The scope is broad and flexible, and authors are invited to correspond with the editors about the appropriateness of their articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信