Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Understanding Process Tracing

  • David Collier (a1)
Abstract

Process tracing is a fundamental tool of qualitative analysis. This method is often invoked by scholars who carry out within-case analysis based on qualitative data, yet frequently it is neither adequately understood nor rigorously applied. This deficit motivates this article, which offers a new framework for carrying out process tracing. The reformulation integrates discussions of process tracing and causal-process observations, gives greater attention to description as a key contribution, and emphasizes the causal sequence in which process-tracing observations can be situated. In the current period of major innovation in quantitative tools for causal inference, this reformulation is part of a wider, parallel effort to achieve greater systematization of qualitative methods. A key point here is that these methods can add inferential leverage that is often lacking in quantitative analysis. This article is accompanied by online teaching exercises, focused on four examples from American politics, two from comparative politics, three from international relations, and one from public health/epidemiology.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Understanding Process Tracing
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Understanding Process Tracing
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Understanding Process Tracing
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
References
Hide All
Bates, Robert H., Greif, Avner, Levi, Margaret, Rosenthal, Jean-Laurent, and Weingast, Barry. 1998. Analytic Narratives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bennett, Andrew. 2008. “Process Tracing: A Bayesian Perspective.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, ed. Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., Brady, Henry E., and Collier, David, 702–21. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bennett, Andrew. 2010. “Process Tracing and Causal Inference.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd ed., ed. Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, 207–19. Lanham, MD. Rowman and Littlefield.
Berk, Richard A. 2004. Regression Analysis: A Constructive Critique. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Brady, Henry E. 2010. “Data-Set Observations versus Causal-Process Observations: The 2000 U.S. Presidential Election.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd ed., ed. Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, 237–42. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Brady, Henry E., Collier, David, and Seawright, Jason. 2010. “Refocusing the Discussion of Methodology.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd ed., ed. Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, 1531. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Campbell, Donald T. 1975. “‘Degrees of Freedom’ and the Case Study.” Comparative Political Studies 8 (2) : 178–93.
Collier, David, Brady, Henry E., and Seawright, Jason. 2010a. “Sources of Leverage in Causal Inference: Toward an Alternative View of Methodology.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd ed., ed. Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, 161–99. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Collier, David, Brady, Henry E., and Seawright, Jason. 2010b. “Outdated Views of Qualitative Methods: Time to Move On.” Political Analysis 18 (4) : 506–13.
Copi, Irving M. 1953. Introduction to Logic. New York: Macmillan.
Doyle, Arthur Conan. 1960/1986. The Complete Sherlock Holmes, Vol. 1 and 2. New York: Doubleday. The 1986 edition (New York: Bantam Classics) is available in paperback, and all the stories are readily available online.
Fenno, Richard F. Jr. 1977. “U.S. House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration.” American Political Science Review 71 (3): 883917.
Fenno, Richard F. Jr. 1978. Home Style: House Members in their Districts. Boston: Little, Brown.
Fenno, Richard F. Jr. 1998. Senators on the Campaign Trail: The Politics of Representation. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Freedman, David A. 2010a. “On Types of Scientific Inquiry: The Role of Qualitative Reasoning.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd ed., ed. Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, 221–36. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Freedman, David A. 2010b. Statistical Models and Causal Inference: A Dialogue with the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Garfinkel, Harold. 1981. Forms of Explanation. Rethinking the Questions in Social Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
George, Alexander L. 1979. “Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison.” In Diplomacy: New Approaches in History, Theory and Policy, ed. Lauren, Paul Gordon, 4368. New York: The Free Press.
George, Alexander L., and Bennett, Andrew. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
George, Alexander L., and McKeown, Timothy J.. 1985. “Case Studies and Theories of Organizational Decision Making.” In Advances in Information Processing in Organizations, Vol. 2. ed. Coulam, Robert F. and Smith, Richard A., 2158. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Hall, Peter A. 2003. “Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Research.” In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, 373404. New York: Cambridge University Press.
King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lazarsfeld, Paul F. 1940. “Introduction.” In The Unemployed Man and His Family, ed. Komarovsky, Mirra, ix–xii. New York: Dryden.
Lerner, Daniel. 1958. The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East. New York: The Free Press. A somewhat abridged version, which unfortunately omits some key details, is reprinted in Development: A Cultural Studies Reader, ed. Susanne Schech, and Jane Haggis (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002). This abridged version is available online in Google Books at: http://tinyurl.com/Lerner-Grocer-Chief.
Levy, Jack S. 2008. “Counterfactuals and Case Studies.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, ed. Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., Brady, Henry E., and Collier, David, 627–44. New York: Oxford University Press.
Luebbert, Gregory M. 1991. Liberalism, Fascism, or Social Democracy: Social Classes and the Political Origins of Regimes in Interwar Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mahoney, James. 2010. “After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research.” World Politics 62 (1): 120–47.
McAdam, Doug, Tarrow, Sidney, and Tilly, Charles. 2001. Dynamics of Contention. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mill, John Stuart. 1974. A System of Logic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Przeworski, Adam, and Teune, Henry E.. 1970. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley.
Rogowski, Ronald. 2010. “How Inference in the Social (but Not the Physical) Sciences Neglects Theoretical Anomaly.” In Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd ed., ed. Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, 8997. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Schultz, Kenneth A. 2001. Democracy and Coercive Diplomacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sewell, William. 1996. “Three Temporalities: Toward an Eventful Sociology.” In The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences, ed. McDonald, Terrence J., 245–80. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Skocpol, Theda, Gans, Herbert, and Munson, Ziad. 2000. “A Nation of Organizers: The Institutional Origins of American Civic Life.” American Political Science Review 94 (3) : 527–46.
Tannenwald, Nina. 1999. “The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use.” International Organization 53 (3): 433–68.
Tilly, Charles. 2001. “Mechanisms in Political Processes.” Annual Review of Political Science 4: 2141.
Van Evera, Stephen. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Vineberg, Susan. 1996. “Eliminative Induction and Bayesian Confirmation Theory.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26 (June): 257–66.
Waldner, David. 2011. “Process Tracing: Its Promise and Its Problems.” Paper presented at the Institute for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, Syracuse University.
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Weaver, Vesla M. 2007. “Frontlash: Race and the Development of Punitive Crime Policy.” Studies in American Political Development 21 (Fall): 230–65.
Yin, Robert K. 1984/2008. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 1st and 4th ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Collier supplementary material
Examples and Exercises

 PDF (265 KB)
265 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed