You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Thickening Thin Concepts and Theories: Combining Large N and Small in Comparative Politics
Vol. 31, No. 4 (Jul., 1999), pp. 465-476
Published by: Comparative Politics, Ph.D. Programs in Political Science, City University of New York
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/422240
Page Count: 12
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Small-N comparison and quantitative large-N analyses need each other. Small-N analysis needs to generalize and test its "thick" complex theories; quantitative studies need to be based on richer concepts and a greater variety of explanatory factors. They have the potential to be quite complementary. In principle, thick concepts can be translated into the thin format of quantitative data, and the nuanced, conditional, complex, and contextualized hypotheses of small-N analysis can be translated into quantitative models. However, in order to make these approaches complementary in practice, different data would need to be collected, and data would need to be collected more systematically and rigorously.
Comparative Politics © 1999 Comparative Politics, Ph.D. Programs in Political Science, City University of New York