Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-14T09:46:32.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Annotation for Transparent Inquiry Can Enhance Research Transparency in Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2021

Markus B. Siewert Open the ORCID record for Markus B. Siewert [Opens in a new window]
Markus B. Siewert*
Affiliation:
Bavarian School of Public Policy at the Technical University of Munich
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI): Transparency in Practice in Qualitative and Multi-Method Research
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 487 - 491
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, Christopher, and David, M. A. Mehler. 2019. “Open Science Challenges, Benefits and Tips in Early Career and Beyond.” PLOS Biology 17 (5): e3000246. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American Political Science Association. 2012. Committee on Professional Ethics, Rights and Freedoms, “A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science.” Washington, DC: American Political Science Association. www.apsanet.org/portals/54/Files/Publications/APSAEthicsGuide2012.pdf.Google Scholar
Barrett, Andrew W., and Eshbaugh-Soha, Matthew. 2007. “Presidential Success on the Substance of Legislation.” Political Research Quarterly 60 (1): 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912906298605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckmann, Matthew N. 2010. Pushing the Agenda: Presidential Leadership in U.S. Lawmaking, 1953–2004. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Büthe, Tim, and Jacobs, Alan M.. 2015. “Conclusion: Research Transparency for a Diverse Discipline.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 52–64.Google Scholar
Elman, Colin, and Kapiszewski, Diana. 2014. “Data Access and Research Transparency in the Qualitative Tradition.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096513001777.Google Scholar
Elman, Colin, Kapiszewski, Diana, and Lupia, Arthur. 2018. “Transparent Social Inquiry: Implications for Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 21 (1): 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-091515-025429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haven, Tamarinde L., and Grootel, Leonie Van. 2019. “Preregistering Qualitative Research.” Accountability in Research 26 (3): 229–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2019.1580147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Alan M., Büthe, Tim, Arjona, Ana, Arriola, Leonardo R., Bellin, Eva, Bennett, Andrew, Björkman, Lisa, et al. 2021. “The Qualitative Transparency Deliberations: Insights and Implications.” Perspectives on Politics 19 (1): 171–208. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592720001164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana, and Karcher, Sebastian. 2021. “Transparency in Practice in Qualitative Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics 54 (2): 285–91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000955.Google Scholar
Mahoney, James, and Goertz, Gary. 2006. “A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research.” Political Analysis 14 (3): 227–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpj017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2014. “Trust, but Verify: The Transparency Revolution and Qualitative International Relations.” Security Studies 23 (4): 663–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2014.970846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musgrave, Paul, and Karcher, Sebastian. 2018. “Seven Reasons We Use Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI).” Duck of Minerva [blog], May 15. https://duckofminerva.com/2018/05/seven-reasons-we-use-annotation-for-transparent-inquiry-ati.html.Google Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudalevige, Andrew. 2002. Managing the President’s Program: Presidential Leadership and Legislative Policy Formulation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Carsten Q., and Wagemann, Claudius. 2012. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagemann, Claudius, and Schneider, Carsten Q.. 2015. “Transparency Standards in Qualitative Comparative Analysis.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 38–43.Google Scholar