Reading and Answering: Theory and Method in Comparative Research

Reading and Answering: Theory and Method in Comparative Research

Instructions

Reading & Answering (2 pages):

“Reading & Answering” is a reading summary but questions guided. It should summarize the author’s main points they’ve been presented in the paper. You cannot write an accurate summary unless you make careful choices about the essential or central text. You have to learn to filter out not unnecessary material that doesn’t contribute to the author’s central argument. A summary is not simply a compilation of random notes. Your task is to identify the author’s main points and critical evidence

Included below is this week’s reading, “Theory and method in comparative research: two strategies”.  I also attached an example of reading and answering paper alongside the rubric/what should be included in the paper

Reading and Answering: Theory and Method in Comparative Research

Ragin and Zaret (1983) paper examines Weber and Durkheim’s comparative techniques and links them to particular presuppositions. According to Ragin and Zaret (1983)’s piece writing, Durkheim and Weber’s comparative strategies are similar in generalization and explanation in sociological evaluation though distinct in degree. Their report argues that while Durkheim and Weber’s have specific similarities, they are different based on causality conception, adequate explanation conception, the logic of analysis, and analysis of units. The two further argue that in their empirical findings and evidence, Weber and Durkheim’s comparative strategies would be combined in complementary approaches. While differentiating between Weber’s case-based and Durkheim’s variable-based approach, Ragin and Zaret (1983) argue that Weber’s practice focuses on understanding complex units. Durkheim’s technique is fixed on creating generalized relationships between variables. Indeed, Durkheim and Weber, based on Ragin and Zaret (1983) piece of writing, focus on providing a balance between generality and complexity competing for a claim in sociological analysis. They argue that Weber and Durkheim’s sociology vision provides remedies to constitutive challenges of generality and complexity in social research.

As incorporated in the article, ragin and Zaret (1983) ‘s methodology is effective in social research. For instance, Ragin and Zaret (1983) discuss how the comparative strategy applied by Weber is well-efficient for analyzing the sociological issues, which cannot be tackled efficiently by other statistical comparative approaches. They argue that other than answering questions dealing with historical structures and processes, Weber further aids in research subject conceptualization. His case-based comparative research, as noted, is critical in social studies as it is fixed in documenting and assessing adequate causes of an issue and providing a historical explanation. Correspondingly, Weber’s comparative strategy, as discussed, is essential in social researches since it incorporates implicit and explicit qualitative historical techniques establishing a genetic basis.

On the other hand, Ragin and Zaret (1983) methodological proposal feature also inform the reader to understand the contemporary Weberian and Durkheimian’s comparative strategies. The learner thus notes as a preliminary analysis on qualitative historical comparisons, the Durkheimian technique is the strongest, whereas, for statistical differentiation, the Weberian approach is the best. Besides noting a rigorous definition of the issue, the researcher notes the population construction, essential conclusion and causal mechanisms vital for observing correlations. Also, Ragin and Zaret (1983)’s audience is informed that methodological procedures are constructed depending on the theoretical commitments and interests, which are epistemological and substantive.

Indeed, through Ragin and Zaret (1983) article, a reader notes the essence of various comparative techniques, which are critical in research. Precisely, a reader notes that theoretical concepts are in some cases linked to units as systems and realist conception and that system causes in research analysis use correlational methods and historical cause’s studies are presented via the help of qualitative historical methods. Additionally, through Weber and Durkheim’s methodological convergence, a reader understands qualitative, historical, and statistical comparison strategies. They are effective in understanding theoretical and methodological features in sociological researches. Via Weber’s case-based and Durkheim’s comparative techniques, a reader seeks to note and understand complex units and establish a generalized relationship between variables, respectively. Also, it helps a reader understands the essence of Weber and Durkheim’s methodological reflections in social researches.

References

Ragin, C., & Zaret, D. (1983). Theory and method in comparative research: Two strategies. Social forces, 61(3), 731-754.