Application of Process Tracing Method in Organizational and Management Research

Document Type : علمی - پژوهشی

Authors

1 Specialized Doctorate, University of Tehran

2 University of Shahid Beheshti

3 PhD, assistant professor, University of Tehran

Abstract

Researchers in the field of organization and management, generally conduct research with the aim of describing or explaining a phenomenon. Clearly, in researches aimed at explanation, it is important to identify the causal chains that create a phenomenon. Since the discovery of correlations between two variables, which is a common method in quantitative research, cannot indicate the existence or absence of causal relationships, taking a qualitative approach and, in particular, the case study method is recommended to researchers. In this research, while introducing the process tracing method, which is one of the most important tools of causal inference in qualitative research and case study, an attempt is made to describe its various techniques and the capacities resulting from the application of this method. Since, the executive mechanism of the process tracing method, unlike statistical models or even other issues related to qualitative methods, has not been studied much, at the end of this study, the method of applying and implementing this method is examined.

Keywords

References

1. خنیفر، حسین و ناهید مسلمی (1398)، اصول و مبانی روش‎های پژوهش کیفی: رویکردی نو و کاربردی، ج2، تهران: نگاه دانش.
2. طالبان، محمدرضا (1389)، «تحلیل خلاف واقع در تبیین‌های تاریخی علوم اجتماعی»، علوم اجتماعی (دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی مشهد)، دوره 7، ش1،ص85−120.
3. Barrowman, N. (2014), Correlation, Causation, and Confusion. The New Atlantis, 43, 23−44.
4. Beach, D. & Pedersen, R. B. (2013), Process−Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines, Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.
5. Befani, B. & Stedman−Bryce, G. (2017), Process Tracing and Bayesian Updating for impact evaluation. Evaluation, 23(1), 42–60. doi.org/10.1177/1356389016654584.
6. Bennett, A. (2008), Process Tracing: A Bayesian Perspective. Pp. 217−70 in The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, edited by J. Box−Steffensmeier, H. E. Brady and D. Collier. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Bennett, A. & Checkel, J. (2014), Introduction: Process tracing: From philosophical roots to best practices, In: Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Boyce, P. (2018), Editorial: Correlation, causation and confusion, Lighting Research & Technology, 50(5), 657–657. doi.org/10.1177/1477153518787733.
9. Collier, D. (2011). Understanding Process Tracing. PS: Political Science and Politics, 44 (4), 823-830.
10. Collier, D., Brady, H. E. & Seawright, J. (2010), Sources of Leverage in Causal Inference: Toward an Alternative View of Methodology, In H. E. Brady & D. Collier (Eds.), Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards (2nd ed., 161−200), Lnham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
11. Falleti, T. G., & Lynch, J. F. (2009), Context and Causal Mechanisms in Political Analysis, Comparative Political Studies, 42(9), 1143–1166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414009331724.
12. Fearon, J. D. (1991), “Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science”, World Politics 43 (2): 169–95.
13. George, A. L. & Bennett, A. (2005), Case Studies and Theory Development in Social Sciences (Cambridge: MIT Press).
14. Goldstone, J. A. (1998), ‘Initial Conditions, General Laws, Path Dependence, and Explanation in Historical Sociology, American Journal of Sociology, 10, 829−45.
15. Hall, P.A. (2003), ‘Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Research’, in J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer (eds.), Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 373–404.
16. Hay, C. (2016), Process tracing: a laudable aim or a high−tariff methodology? New Political Economy, 21(5), 1–5. doi:10.1080/13563467.2016.1201806
17. Hedström, P. & Ylikoski, P. K. (2010), Causal Mechanisms in the Social Sciences, Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 49−67.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102632
18. Humphreys, M. & Jacobs, A. (2015), Mixing methods: A bayesian approach, American Political Science.
19. Mahoney, J. (2012), The Logic of Process Tracing Tests in the Social Sciences, Sociological Methods & Research, 41(4), 570–597, https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124112437709.
20. Punton, M. & Welle, K. (2015), Straws-in-the-wind, Hoops and Smoking Guns: What can Process Tracing Offer to Impact Evaluation?, CDI Practice Paper 10, Brighton: IDS.
21. Ricks, J. & Liu, A. (2018), Process−Tracing Research Designs: A Practical Guide. PS: Political Science & Politics, 51(4), 842−846. Doi:10.1017/S1049096518000975.
22. Rohlfing, I. (2013), Varieties of Process Tracing and Ways to Answer Why−Questions, European Political Science, 12(1), 31–39. doi:10.1057/eps.2012.7.
23. Salmon, W. (2020), Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World: Princeton University Press, doi.org/10.1515/9780691221489.
24. Slater, D. & Wong, J. (2013), “The Strength to Concede: Ruling Parties and Democratization in Developmental Asia”, Perspectives on Politics 11 (3): 717–33.
25. Tansey, O. (2007), Process Tracing and Elite Interviewing: A Case for Non−probability Sampling, PS: Political Science & Politics, 40, 765−772. doi:10.1017/S1049096507071211.
26. Trampusch, C. & Palier, B. (2016), Between X and Y: how process tracing contributes to opening the black box of causality, New Political Economy, 21, 437–454.
27. Van Evera, S. (1997), Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science, Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.
28. Waldner, D. (2015), “What Makes Process−Tracing Good? Causal Mechanisms, Causal Inference, and the Completeness Standard in Comparative Politics.” In Process−Tracing, ed, Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey T. Checkel, 126–52, New York: Cambridge University Press.
29. Zaks, S. (2017), “Relationships Among Rivals (RAR): A Framework for Analyzing Contending Hypotheses in Process−Tracing”, Political Analysis 25 (3): 344–62.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics