Multiple and Mixed Methods: New Logics of Social Research

By Wendy Olsen
Series: Quantitative Research Kit. Series Editors: Malcolm Williams,
Richard Wiggins, Betsy McCoach, and founding Editor Paul Vogt.
Publishers: London: Sage.
2019
NOTE: This is a draft copy of chapter 9. You may cite this work as
manuscript. Thanks for any feedback to
wendy.olsen@manchester.ac.uk

Table of Contents
Preface
Ch. 1 Introduction: Mixed Methods for Research on Open Systems
Ch. 2 Mixed Methods with Weakly Structuralist Regression Models
Ch. 3 Causality and Mixed-Methods Projects That Use Regression
Ch. 4 Multiple Logics in Systematic Mixed Methods Research (SMMR)
Ch. 5 Factor Analysis in Systematic Mixed Methods Contexts
Ch. 6 Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Retroduction in Mixed Methods
Ch. 7 Calibration of Fuzzy Sets, Calibration of Measurement: A Realist Synthesis
Ch. 8 Interpretations, Meanings and Discourses
Ch. 9 Summarising the Logics and Methods
References

Chapter 9: Summarising the Logics and Methods

Books on mixed-methods research differ considerably in their content. This book has focused
on mixed-methods research designs and logics that include the use of quantities. It is feasible
to give an overview here, although a challenge arises because so many different research
designs are possible. My overview covers three areas: first the multiple logics of reasoning
that we use while doing research; second I will stress several original methods that I offered
in the book; and thirdly, conclusions about methodological orientations overall.

In bringing all the themes together, an approach known as holism comes to the front. Holism
is the notion that wholes exist and that they influence the little partial entities within them,
and each other. Holism itself is related to causal holism, in which a causal factor might be a
large-scale, macro or meso factor and potentially influence many micro entities (class affects
status of individuals, for example). Holism also brings to the fore that the researcher is a part
of the scene, not out of it. Therefore the summary of logics in research explains explicitly
how we use holism to good purposes.

There were five logics of reasoning if counted separately; we use them in sequence and in
iterative steps in a flexible order that allows feedback. This process then opens up revised
‘arena’ questions, questions about the scope and range of the research question. Many
scholars before me have made this point that the findings may lead the research team back to
re-assessing the fundamental theoretical starting point. In this book it is often explicit (as

1
also explained in Olsen, EJDR 2019). Therefore a reformulation of the ‘research question’
can occur.

Induction

The first type of logic was induction, a move from particulars to general statements.
Induction can underpin some kinds of claim that appear ‘factual’. It can also underpin
abstract claims (Byrne, 2005). An inductive abstract statement must rest at some point in its
reasoning upon evidence or upon the real-world observations of a person. Induction can be
seen as quite narrow and particular, but it is also possible to use induction to move to general
statements (see Sayer, 1992, Chapters 1-2). Inductive conclusions can be challenged on two
grounds – first how generalisable are the claims across space, or time, or social scenes? And
second, how far did a presumed narrative couch the findings in a given language, and was
this initially presumed narrative taken for granted? It was perhaps not re-assessed for its
usefulness and fit, making it subject to contestation. These challenges lead research teams to
supplement their inductive methods.

I argued that there is a large grey area of contested and contestable claims which have some
claim to validity through inductive reasoning. I also argued that evidence could be used to
falsify someone else’s inductive claim. However, again, the points made by each side in an
argument can all be subject to further questioning or even subject to attack.

Deduction

The second logic was deduction. The deductivist approach to mathematical derivations does
not cover much of the research design in any project, whether mixed methods or not. I took a
strong view against the nomothetic hypothesis-testing school of thought if it is linked to the
claim that the conclusion of a deductive argument is a social fact. (Note that the use of the
concept of fact differs in Thomann and Magetti (2017) versus in this book. In this book, a
fact is a claim about reality, while in that work the facts are valid or invalid as a matter of
objective assessment. Morgan and Olsen (2005) presented arguments in favour of realising
that facts and ficts are different, and that both can be contested.) However this book has dealt
carefuly with the potentially useful, attractive practices of ‘testing a hypothesis’ which is also
rooted in the nomothetic approach. The actual testing of a hypothesis can lead us to new
discoveries, and it can aid in generating useful conversations about policy or norms, or about
the world itself, and therefore is of wide interest. I supported that this testing took a typically
deductive format: review the literature to derive theories [or explanations], formulate testable
hypotheses from these, gather data, test the hypotheses, and decide which are falsified.

There were two reasons for questioning social facts, parallel to those which can be used to
challenge inductive reasoning: The first is asking how generally would the ‘law’ (nomos) or
the hypothesis be applicable? I particularly challenged individualism and atomism for an
excessive generality throughout the book. The risk of spreading a truth about a sample to a
larger group of entities, beyond that sample’s population, is present in hypothesis testing.
This challenge can be easily addressed using careful research design and clear ex post
writing. Another way of putting this is that inference from sample to population must
carefully set boundaries on external validity. Claims may not be valid beyond the sample data
and beyond that data’s time-period. Secondly, I expressed concerns about unquestioned
initial narratives. It is possible for the research team’s grand narratives or discourse habits to
lie quiet, unaddressed and uncritiqued; and yet to exhibit themselves in key ways, because

2
there are discourses that underpin power and inequality in society. Research write-ups are
not immune to the suffusive nature of social power. Whilst power has many meanings
(power-over, power-with, capacity-to, and the ability to shift an agenda), in all these cases it
is generally the case that discourses underpin power and power suffuses social data and
claims about society. I gave examples from banking (Chapter 8 *).

However there is a place for deductive reasoning in the pantheon of methods. It is used to get
from one pattern of data or algebra to another. Deductive reasoning is not the same as ‘the
scientific method’. Any textbook for beginners that equates these two is going to run into
contradictions and difficulties. Deductive reasoning encompasses a much wider range of
modes of reasoning than mere scientific hypothesis-testing. As examples, I have offered
multilevel modelling shrinkage estimates (Ch. 4), QCA Boolean truth-table reduction (Ch. 6),
and the analysis of coded qualitative data ‘nodes’ (Ch. 8).*Re-confirm* Deductions sit within
more complex argument types and indeed, argumentative styles.

In the qualitative chapter of this book, I explored a few ways to unpick the given discourses,
make them explicit, name them and analyse them. In this process the researcher is within the
research scene, not outside of it. This idea of the embedded researcher underpins the ‘situated
knowledge’ approach to science, found in Chapters 2-3 and 8. It is a solid foundation for
research. I assume that research occurs in a context of social dialogue and is not conducted by
a person with a “God’s-Eye View”. The foundations of research are a matter for discussion
and are not fixed.

Retroduction
During a project, we revisit the scene of the research or the existing dataset, and we plumb
these resources for ideas that help explain what we are seeing. This is known as retroduction,
or asking ‘why?’ in a self-guided way. With retroduction, we re-state key points of
knowledge that are taken as given or which may be present as an absence in the research data.
Noticing an ‘absence’ requires that we have existing knowledge – or we widen our
knowledge – to realise that this absence is a key one out of all the other things absent. We
also can consider why the data look a particular way and generate possible themes that
explain why the data have those patterns. Here, retroduction is like explaining the findings. I
distinguished the closed form of retroduction, when we limit the explanation to existing data,
from the open forms which extend our thinking to anything that is among the conditions of
possibility of the observed patterns and data. Retroduction sits well with either induction or
deductive reasoning but is not the same as either.
I was keen to enhance retroduction by arguing for three new forms of discovery. Here I
summarise from Chapter *:
- There are discoveries of key meso-level entitles which affect outcomes across a wide
swathe of the data, found either through multi-level modelling (Ch 4) or through
discourse analysis (Ch 8).
- There is the realisation that some profound historically unique condition is acting as a
key mechanism to produce outcomes in the data. For example to discover and then
argue that capitalism has, as an essence, a drive to productivity or a drive to
accumulation, might be a form of retroduction. Authors are then ready to engage in
theoretical debates are the articulation of different forms and systems of capitalism
with other social entities and with nature.
- Lastly, there is the realisation that there is macro-level diversity with small ‘N’ and
that it matters. Hospitals or universities in two regions operating under different
taxation regimes within one country might be an example. It’s not just that the

3
 country is federal nor that the tax regimes are what they are… the key discovery is, to
what do the two taxation regimes make a difference? Those accustomed to survey
data and regression methods may need to practice drawing upon the essential features
of the macro entities to develop an argument about what their effects are; drawing
upon historical evidence to discern the roots of the differentiation of tax regimes; and
convincing audiences that it is not just a matter of dummy variables but profoundly
social specificity of the hospitals (or universities) in each region.

Synthesis

The fourth logic is synthesis where we combine statements from a range of elements in a
study – premises, which may be assertions or assumptions; data and induction; deductive
logic perhaps; multiple stakeholder voices and so on. Synthesising these is a way to reach
some conclusions, focused perhaps on your original research question, while also being ready
and willing to draw conclusions that are surprising to you or your team. I argued that as a
career progresses, individual researchers move from team to team, and from project to
project. Synthesis can happen at random or in a concerted and documented fashion. Write-
ups and presentations contain a synthesis. A dialogue ensues. There is no final conclusion.

These realist methods strongly contrast with the philosophical ‘syllogism’, a form of
reasoning from Premises to Conclusions that makes the intervening logic explicit. The
syllogism is a way to place a series of statements in relation to each other. The contrast is
that realist statements make reference to underlying entities, not merely to the statements
themselves (Olsen, book chapter, 2019). ‘Deep linkage’ and in-depth interpretation take us
beyond syllogistic reasoning. Perhaps a third form of logic is to draw deep linkages between
different types of evidence, and in so doing, to come to conclusions about what is happening
at a deeper level in a society.

For Bhaskar (1989*), a critical realist philosopher, the key element of scientific realism that
was missing in the ‘hypothesis-testing’ approach was meta-critique (critique of theoretical
starting points). I concur with that point. If we look at women’s mental health (Chapter 1),
there are social class issues, labour-market issues, and post-colonial issues. If we look at
homelessness and the anti-homelesness social movements, there are again social class issues
and there are issues around migration and ethnicity. Thus, in carrying out a meta-critique, a
research team often has to deal with wider issues than they originally expected to look at.
Mixed methods research may draw a project away from one specialism and into alliance with
others who are conducting debates on a broader stage.

There is a risk of superficiality in induction and deduction. (Induction might suffer from
assuming all the evidence is composed of true facts; deduction might suffer from not
referring to latent entities.) These were points that Bhaskar (1989) and Sayer (1992, 2000)
made from a realist point of view. When we bring together logics in a complex synergy, we
can avoid some of the more obvious weaknesses.

Once the iterated feedback looping starts, we may find errors and mistakes in the data. We
may conclude, after doing deep linkage with qualitative and quantitative evidence, that some
of the earlier claims were misleading and could lead the reader up a side alley. We develop a
new focus and fresh insights. This move generates significant, original, innovative research.
Mixing methods is helpful when aiming for this stage.

4
Recognising Relevant Irreducible Phenomena [Holism]

I described data reduction in Chapters 5 and 6, but this was not a move in logic. It was
mainly a handy way to simplify a data table. One data reduction method for survey data was
latent variable analysis, which helped us create a scale. The data-reduction method used in
QCA and fuzzy-set analysis is typically a Boolean simplification of a true statement about a
situation (Chapter 6). We might move from fifty individual pathways to reach condition Y
and then summarise them as 10 main pathway types to reach Y. Data reduction via Boolean
methods might even lead to a further simplification (A is necessary for Y but three pathways
are each sufficient for Y, given A.) In QCA, another form of reduction also occurs. I call it
fuzzy intersection. If we look at a configuration containing characteristics R, F and A then
we are taking RFA which means the intersection of these three. We could call this a new
fuzzy set, and give it the name X. It has its own range of measurements: It will tend to be
lower than R or F or A, because it takes the minimum value of R, F and A for each case.
Data reduction that simplifies a data set leads to straightforward hypothesis tests, which may
be powerful and encompassing rather than simply leading us away from true detail. Thus, the
data reduction methods I have listed enable arguments that have a strong purchase on the
world, rooted in data from a concretely identified part of the world in space and time.

Thirdly, in Chapter 8, data transformation also gave a reductive glimpse of a large textual
database. Thus there were three main methods of ‘data reduction’ in the book.

 Latent variables to enable survey data-set reduction

 Truth table reduction to simplify causal pathway representations;
 And Discourse codes to indicate key aspects of discursive patterns.

If data reduction is considered desirable, we can also ask: Is there any phenomenon which is
irreducible? If so, is this part of its essential nature, or is it just a question of our subjective
choice to see it as an irreducible whole? A simple example is that the class structure is a
whole set of classes and class relations. If a class structure has features which cannot be
reduced to its constituent elements, then it is, as a whole, a unique and special thing. We may
say a class structure is irreducible.

The fundamental logic of the realist argument is that if something is irreducible, then calling
it by a given name helps to draw upon and highlight the key essential facets of that ‘thing’
which make it so. We do not argue that naming something exhausts the nature of that thing.
Naming something is also not going to solve social problems. Naming things is, however, a
useful step in a scientific dialogue. One example I gave was the key differences between
social norms and individual attitudes. By naming attitudes we enable ourselves to think in a
proper way of deviations from social norms, and by naming mezzo-rules – those rules in
society which are not entirely followed (Olsen & Morgan, 2010) – we enable ourselves to
understand better the overall dialectics of a complex social situation. So naming a ‘whole’,
respecting its attributes, is a useful skill. Quantitative social scientists will want to practice
not only regression methods but wider, deeper and more interdisciplinary forms of
argumentation that use wholes as objects in the world. We cannot only study the multiplicity
of individual units.

In all three of the data reduction methods, which are compatible with each other, the
researchers can use either closed retroduction to find out what is the strongest explanatory
factor in a given set of data, or open retroduction to derive an impulse to exit the dataset,

5
refresh and expand it, and later go back to drawing conclusions. In this way, data reduction is
not the end of the process, it is one part of the research process. I challenged the critics of
QCA, notably those who want the data reduction to be ‘complete’ and ‘correct’ (Baumgartner
and Thiem, 2017), or those who are apparently entirely atomistic in ontology (Lucas and
Szatrowski, 2014). The excessively atomistic (non-holist) approaches are widely known as
methodological individualist. I offered a challenge to individualism and atomism.

The presence of holism, and the existence of key entities as wholes, is likely to make the
research team realise the importance of going back to the field (open retroduction). Ragin in
particular has encouraged both of these as how to do sociology or political research well
(1987, 2000, 2008). Another widely respected author, Charmaz (2014) also advises that
revisiting the field will help in a concluding analysis. In this book, I have argued that holistic
objects and irreducibility are related. Yet those who do not call realism by its name have
perhaps avoided having the arguments that will push more researchers forward to the
following important realisations:
 Holism: The embeddedness of cases in wholes, whether macro or meso-institutional
factors ‘above’ the case level. Therefore, seeking to know more about whole entities
is valuable.
 Openness: Many systems in society are open, and not closed. Obvious examples are
the food system, the climate system, and the class system. Open systems change from
within.
 Non-reduction: To explore why, we often resort to examining wider aspects like
historical context, regulation or corruption environments, politics, or social norms of
sub-groups. These are irreducible to the micro-level cases.

Logical Linkage
The fifth mode of logic was to piece together an analysis using elements of all the above
modes of reasoning: linking logics. A wide range of mixtures is possible. I described the
various exemplars in Chapters 2 and 4 to show what has been done in studies that typically
use quantitative methods along with – or perhaps whilst in need of – mixed methods.

Conclusion
Once we have absorbed all the five logics above, we realise that the conclusion of a study is
its claims, not just in a regression results table or a reduced-form equation or a model. Both
statistics and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) can be improved by recognising this
point. It would be wrong to criticize QCA for having the ‘wrong pathways’ in its reduced-
form equation, since the issue is not about the reduced truth table but what claims were made
about the world. It is also very wise to explore the kinds of mistakes that may take place
using the regression, fuzzy-set or crisp-set QCA frameworks, or discourse analysis.

In conclusion, researchers should take on board all five logics and learn to use them flexibly.

Methods

In this book I described systematic mixed-methods research (SMMR) as those studies which
contain a systematised data table but still have depth thinking or a depth ontology, and
multiple methods to deal with the different layers. To give two examples: Ragin and Byrne
introduced to sociologists how to allow for a distinction between facilitating conditions and
agentive causes (Chapter 6). Bhaskar pointed out that reasons can be real, but they do not

6
exhaust nor even cover all of, the real underlying causes (see Archer, et al., 1998). Since
causes are not mutually exclusive they overlap: this leads to problems with the traditional
statistical concept of parsimony.

I also described how action research could use realist methods of critique and retroduction.
This meant stakeholder voices could be brought to the fore in research. Many studies of this
kind exist. However it is not right to call our analysis of them strong social constructivism.
We can use a weak, combined form of social constructionist methods. We must not ignore
the various insights we can get from the realist approach and from retroduction to social-
structural and institutional causal mechanisms. I tend to call the discourse analysis done by
realists weak social constructivism instead of strong social constructivism. I stress the
realism aspect, and the practice of naming via essential features. We can be both confident
and self-reflexive at the same time. My approach to deep linkages advocates using many
logical steps that do not fit in with the strong social constructivist approach.

I also described various forms of structural equation modelling embedded into a mixed-
methods approach. These were hard to label and are probably best called multiple-method
studies. The possible combinations of these methods are endless, as pointed out by other
scholars on mixed methods. Hence labelling a project by its ‘sequence’ of methods is only
part of the task of research design. The key issues for quantitative methods in mixed methods
are going to be variable choice, creation of unique datasets, data combining, triangulation, the
staging of parts of the research, the overlap and endogeneity that will inevitably arise, bias
due to omitted variables, model choice and nested models, model goodness-of-fit, and
competing pluralist vs. mono-disciplinary explanations.

My viewpoint on epistemology was that using statistical measures of good fit helped with
finalising the data reduction, and yet it did not lead to ‘conclusions’. The step of drawing
conclusions is a step carried out by humans. This step is necessarily couched in language that
you carefully hone, using not only the statistical model but several ‘Arena Stage’ matters
such as which disciplines you cover, what is the leading theory, what theories you criticise or
omit, and which levels of society to handle explicitly. We cannot create a black-box computer
package to carry out mixed methods research.

There were many ways to triangulate in this smorgasbord of methods. You can create a
mixture with N differentials using two-survey triangulation strategy (one larger data set, and
one smaller dataset that has additional key variables). You may decide to create hypotheses
that not only fit the survey data but also respond to the voices of stakeholders or the
documentary analysis or action research rapporteur reports. Therefore, triangulation took
many meanings. It is not just having multiple datasets. It can also mean using several
disciplines; highlighting a key meso-level issue; or adding qualitative methods to another
method.

Methodological Orientations Overall

[A] Meta-Critique and Critique of Theories
You may decide to conduct meta-critique. This will only work with methodological
pluralism. I have set out ways to use ‘pluralism’ that are not just multidisciplinary but also
multi-layered and rich with critique. With a questioning mind, one can come up with new
findings; here, statistical evidence is optional.

7
Thus, mixed-methods careers are something to strongly encourage. Curricula should include
mixed-methods designs. It is good to plan projects that do have a distinct closing date, and
then make sure to successfully finish them. Sometimes the resulting findings cannot fit into a
single journal article, so a whole book arises. An example in India used interviews and
official data on parliamentarians and local government officers, analysed by gender
(*Reference*), My main aim was to give advice on the whole career, not just one project, and
not just ‘mixed methods and multiple methods’.

I made particular contributions to the issue of validity, as approached by those who fall in the
non-empiricist school. In Mills’ terms (1959), the situated knowledge approach (my Chapter
8) falls in nicely with the ‘sociological imagination’ but is now suitable for all late-modern
research, not just sociology. It is a way to be transdisciplinary. It helps you to set up your
initial and alternative arguments. It helps you choose where to publish. It helps your validity
to be higher and improves the credibility of the findings.

The best thing about this orientation is that you can and will find some theories or claims
which you may argue are simply untrue, or are unwise in their framing of an issue, or are
invalid. One has to decide strategically how you will argue this. It is never a personal attack.
It is always reminding groups of scholars – or groups of stakeholders - that there are
advantages and disadvantages to each approach. For instance you might challenge
demographers with their structuralist forecasting based on an appeal to helpful material in the
sociology of religion. As a result you will apply your own creativity to create new studies
with innovations.

Remember that a single counter case could disprove any one particular claim. Therefore use
the Rogerian argument style (*Reference). This is an approach where you read closely the
opposing side’s theories and empirical studies. You give maximum credibility to the version
of the argument that you try to attack. You present this well-reasoned argument to your
reader, then offer an alternative. (Chapter 9 contains a similar contrast between traditional
science and realist science.) Excellent writing skills must be used. Clarity is essential for this
writing strategy to work. The conclusion of your paper or chapter is that your approach is
better than some opposing approach. It may encompass it; or it may just be different and
hence revealing.

When using this orientation, there may be policy implications or practical linkages. You have
to decide to what extent you are doing the translation into the practitioners’ lay languages,
such as medics’ approach to contraception versus a highly theoretical approach to the
‘medicalised body’, both of which contrast with the further opposing view known broadly as
the social approaches to health. It is possible to engage with the stakeholders to re-assess and
re-start your research cycle; it is useful to be able to put key points in a heuristic or simplified
form for some types of output venue (e.g. blogs).

I have successfully offered innovations in mixed methods, helping to create warranted

arguments in both descriptive and persuasive types of scholarly writing. These are the typical
constructions that result from using mixed methods. I also showed many ways that
community research or action research could fit well with SMMR.

[B] Meta-Critique Based on Retroduction

Retroduction works best when a variety of data types are available. I could not build a strong
case for a career or a project using ‘only’ statistical data. Survey data are, themselves, always

8
shaped around deep (either explicit or implicit) conceptual frameworks such as discourses of
measurement and the local lay conceptualisation of entities. As a result, the theoretical is
always mingled with numeric measures in statistical research about the world. I argued that
the social statistician or a statistical expert in the sciences is well served by spending time
learning how to carry out qualitative analysis. Then they can analyse the discourses
underpinning their survey data. This skill is even more important if you are using
unstructured textual data, as found in some data-science projects.

An exception occurs where deductive reasoning can be primary. This would be if the
statistical research is just about the statistical models, e.g. deducing what is a valid lemma
from a set of axioms, or comparing the mathematical properties of two models. Such
reasoning is not social science. It may lie instead in the discipline of mathematics. However
interesting considerations of this kind do appear in applied social science journals, e.g. a
multilevel time-series analysis proposal (Fairbrother, 2014) and textbooks on how to do
multilevel modelling (Snijders and Bosker, 2011).

Generating New Research Ideas

The five logics described earlier can also be used to generate new research hypotheses, new
problems, and new ways of addressing long-standing questions in social sciences.

Further Reading

Flick (1992) introduces the two possible ways to approach epistemology. First you could
assume all evidence is correct and well set out, but second you might begin to question the
underlying frameworks of reference which set up a discourse within which key evidence is
couched. Plano Clark and Creswell (2008) offer a variety of discussions of mixed methods
which touch on the validity and science issues. Lastly, Archer, et al., 1998 is a useful
compendium and reference work on realism. It covers mainly how theory and concepts lead
toward debates in science. It is not limited to social science. For a social-science focus, we
can use the three textbooks on philosophy of science as reference works: Bhaskar, 1979;
Blaikie, 1993; Potter, 2000; and Outhwaite, 1987.

Glossary

Nomothetic: a systematic way to do science by seeking to work out the laws of the social and
natural scene.

Meta-Critique: An analysis of someone’s claims by questioning not only the claims made about the
world, but also the fundamental framings and the discourse chosen. For example one might questions
whether the banking system analysis was appropriate in its coverage if it ignores the whole shadow-
banking economy. One would question the labour-market analysis if it left out domestic work and
social reproduction. In carrying out a meta-critique we ask why the omission or error occurred. It
may not be deliberate per se, but rather a reflection of social trends. By discussing these trends, the
research is raised from atomistic to holistic issues; from micro to macro issues; from perhaps a non-
historical approach to a more historically grounded approach; and from perhaps a non-normative
approach to one which is explicit about underlying and stated norms. It is possible, using meta-
critique, to identify hypocrisy that is not intended by a speaker. Touri and Koteyko (2014) illustrates
by displaying neoliberal contradictions in discourses of public speeches.

9
Methodological pluralism: This complex topic refers to using a mixture of methods, with the
qualitative part being fundamentally rich and inclusive; thus Roth (1987) on merging qualitative and
quantitative data promotes methodological pluralism. There is also a hint of theoretical pluralism in
the literature around this topic. Finally, methodological pluralism can also mean mixing logics, such
as combining a falsification step in a project – which satisfies some more empirically-minded scholars
– with a phenomenological or critical realist step.

References

Agarwal, Bina (2018) Can Group Farms Outperform Individual Family Farms? Empirical
Insights from India, World Development 108:8, 57-73.
Archer, Margaret, Roy Bhaskar, Andrew Collier, Tony Lawson, and Alan Norrie (eds.)
(1998) Critical Realism: Essential Readings, London: Routledge.
Archer, Margaret (*) The Internal Conversation. *
Archer, 2015) citedin ch. 1*
Bartholomew, David, Martin Knott and Irini Moustaki (2011) Latent Variable Models and
Factor Analysis: A Unified Approach, 3rd ed., London: Wiley.
Baumgartner, Michael, and Alrik Thiem (2017) Often Trusted but Never (Properly) Tested:
Evaluating Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Sociological Methods & Research,
XX(X), 1-33. DOI: 10.1177/0049124117701487.
Bayliss, David, Wendy Olsen, and Pierre Walthery (2015) “Well-Being During Recession in
the UK”, Applied Research in Quality of Life. Online first: 29 April 2016 DOI:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11482-016-9465-8.
Beach, Derek (2018) Achieving Methodological Alignment When Combining QCA and
Process Tracing in Practice, Sociological Methods & Research, 47(1) 64-99. DOI:
10.1177/0049124117701475.
Beach, Derek, and Ingo Rohlfing (2015) Integrating Cross-case Analyses and Process
Tracing in Set-Theoretic Research: Strategies and Parameters of Debate, Sociological
Methods & Research, 47(1) 3-36, DOI: 10.1177/0049124115613780.
Befani, Barbara, Barnett, C., & Stern, Elliot (2014) Introduction - Rethinking Impact
Evaluation for Development. Ids Bulletin-Institute of Development Studies, 45(6), 1-5.
doi: 10.1111/1759-5436.12108
Bennett, Andrew, and Jeffrey T. Checkel, eds. (2014) Process Tracing, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bergmann, M. (2008) An Introduction to Many-Valued and Fuzzy Logic: Semantics,
Algebras, and Derivation Systems, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Bhaskar, Roy (1979) The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the
Contemporary Human Sciences. Brighton: Harvester Press.
Bhaskar, Roy (1993) Dialectic and the Pulse of Freedom, London: Verso.
Bhaskar, Roy (1997) A Realist Theory of Science (2nd ed.). London: Verso.
Blaikie, N.W.H. (2000) Designing Social Research: The logic of anticipation. Cambridge,
UK ; Malden, MA: Polity Press : Blackwell.
Blaikie, N.W.H. (2003) Analyzing Quantitative Data. London, Thousand Oaks and New
Delhi: Sage.
Blaikie, Norman (2013) Designing Social Research. 3rd Edition, Cambridge: Polity (2nd ed.
2009)
Blaikie, P. (1993) Approaches to Social Enquiry. Cambridge: Polity.

10
Blanchet, Therese (1996) Lost Innocence Stolen Childhoods, Dhaka: Bangladesh: University
Press Limited.
Bollen, K.A. (1989) Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley Series in Probability
and Statistics, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Bollen, Kenneth, and Judea Pearl (2013) Eight Myths About Causality and Structural
Models, pages 301-328 in S.L. Morgan (Ed.), Handbook of Causal Analysis for Social
Research, London: Springer.
Borsboom, Denny, Gideon J. Mellenbergh, and Jaap van Heerden (2003) The Theoretical
Status of Latent Variables, Psychological Review, 110:2, 203–219, DOI
10.1037/0033-295X.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1979) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, Translated
from French by Richard Nice, 1984; 1st ed. in Classics series 2010, London:
Routledge.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1995) translated from French 2005, The Social Structures of the Economy,
Cambridge UK: Polity Press.
Bowell, T., & Kemp, G. (2015) Critical Thinking: A Concise Guide. 4th ed., London: The
University of Chicago Press.
Bowen, N.K., and S. Guo (2012) Structural Equation Modelling, Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bridges, Sarah, David Lawson, and Sharifa Begum (2011) “Labour Market Outcomes in
Bangladesh: The Role of Poverty and Gender Norms”, European Journal of
Development Research, 23:3, 459-487.
Brown, Timothy A. (2015) 2nd ed. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, NY
and London: Guilford Press.
Bryman, A. (1998) "Quantitative and Qualitative Research Strategies in Knowing the Social
World", in T. May and M. Williams, eds, Knowing the Social World, Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Bryman, Alan (1996, original 1988) Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London:
Routledge.
Bryman, Alan (2002) Social Research Methods, London: Oxford Univ. Press.
Bryman, Alan, and Duncan Cramer (1997) Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS for
Windows: A Guide for Social Scientists, London: Routledge.
Byrne, Barbara (2011) Structural Equation Modelling with MPLUS, London: Routledge.
Byrne, Barbara (1994) Burnout: Testing for the Validity, Replication, and Invariance of
Causal Structure Across Elementary, Intermediate, and Secondary Teachers,
American Educational Research Journal, 31, 645-673.
Byrne, D. (2005) Complexity, Configuration and Cases, Theory, Culture and Society 22(10):
95-111.
Byrne, D. (2009) Using Cluster Analysis, Qualitative Comparative Analysis and NVivo in
Relation to the Establishment of Causal Configurations with Pre-existing Large N
Datasets: Machining Hermeneutics. Pp. 260–68 in The Sage Handbook of Case-Based
Methods, edited by D. Byrne and C. Ragin, London: Sage Publications.
Byrne, David (2002) Interpreting Quantitative Data. London: Sage.
Byrne, David (1998) Complexity Theory and the Social Sciences: An Introduction, London:
Routledge.
Byrne, David, and Ragin, Charles C. (2009) The Sage Handbook of Case-Based Methods,
London: Sage Publications.
Caramani, Daniele (2009) Introduction to the Comparative Method With Boolean Algebra,
Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Series, London: Sage. No. 158.

11
Chakrabarti, S. and C. S. Biswas (2012) "An Exploratory Analysis of Women's
Empowerment in India: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach." Journal of
Development Studies 48(1): 164-180.
Chandola, Tarani (2019) Regression and Archival Research, * in this series).
Charmaz, Kathy (2014) Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., London: Sage.
Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Norman Fairclough (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking
Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Cook, S. (1999) "Methodological aspects of the encompassing principle." Journal of
Economic Methodology 6: 61-78.
Cooper B. and Glaesser, J. (2008) ‘How has educational expansion changed the necessary
and sufficient conditions for achieving professional, managerial and technical class
positions in Britain? A configurational analysis’, Sociological Research Online. DOI
http://www.socresonline.org.uk/13/3/2.html , Accessed June 2013.
Cottrell, Stella (2013) The Study Skills Handbook, 4th Ed., London: Red Globe Press,
Macmillan Skills Series.
Cottrell, Stella (2017) Critical Thinking Skills: Effective Analysis, Argument and Reflection,
2nd ed., London: Macmillan.
Cress, D., and D. Snow (2000) "The Outcome of Homeless Mobilization: the Influence of
Organization, Disruption, Political Mediation, and Framing." American Journal of
Sociology 105(4): 1063-1104. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3003888
Creswell, J. W. (1994) Research Design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed-Methods
Approaches, London: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. and V. L. Plano Clark (2007) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods
Research. Thousand Oaks, California and London: Sage.
Creswell, John W., and Vicki L. Plano Clark (2018) Designing and Conducting Mixed
Methods Research, 3rd ed., London: Sage.
Cross, Beth, and Helen Cheyne (2018) Strength-based approaches: a realist evaluation of
implementation in maternity services in Scotland, Journal of Public Health (2018)
26:4, 425–436, DOI: doi.org/10.1007/s10389-017-0882-4.
Crotty, Michael (1998) The Foundations of Social Research Meaning and Perspective in the
Research Process, London: SAGE Publications.
Dale A., Wathan, J. and Higgins, V (2008) “Secondary Analysis of Quantitative Data
Sources”, Ch. in Alasuutari, P. Bickman, L, Brannen, J. eds., Sage Handbook of
Social Research Methods, London: Sage.
Danermark, Berth, Mats Ekstrom, Liselotte Jakobsen, and Jan Ch. Karlsson, (2002; 1st
published 1997 in Swedish language) Explaining Society: Critical Realism in the
Social Sciences, London: Routledge.
De Vaus, D. A. (2001) Research Design in Social Research. London: Sage.
Dobson, Annette J., and Adrian G. Barnett (2008) An Introduction to Generalized Linear
Models, 3rd Ed., Chapman & Hall/CRC Texts in Statistical Science, London:
Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Dow, S. (2004) Structured Pluralism, Journal of Economic Methodology, 11: 3.
Downward, P. and A. Mearman (2002) "Critical Realism and Econometrics: Constructive
Dialogue with Post Keynesian Economics." Metroeconomica 53(4): 391-415.
Downward, P. and A. Mearman (2004) "On tourism and hospitality management research: A
critical realist proposal." Tourism and Hospitality Planning Development 1(2): 107 -
122.

12
Downward, P. and A. Mearman (2007) "Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in
economic research: reorienting economics into social science." Camb. J. Econ. 31(1):
77-99.
Downward, P., J. Finch, H., et al. (2002) "Critical Realism, Empirical Methods and
Inference: A critical discussion." Cambridge Journal of Economics 26(4): 481.
Ehlers, T. B., and Main, K. (1998) "Women and the False Promise of Microenterprise",
Gender and Society, 12:4, August, pp. 424-440.
Eliason, Scott R., & Robin Stryker (2009) Goodness-of-Fit Tests and Descriptive Measures
in Fuzzy-Set Analysis, Sociological Methods & Research 38:102-146.
Fairbrother, * (? Robinson)cited in chapter 9.
Fairclough, Discourse and Social Power, *, Orient Longman.
Fay, B. (1996) Contemporary Philosophy of Social Science: A Multicultural Approach,
Oxford: Blackwell.
Field, A. (2009) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows: Advanced techniques for
the beginner, London: Sage.
Field, A. (2013) Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, London: Sage, 4th ed.
Fisher, Alec (2001) Critical Thinking: An Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Fisher, Alec (2004) The Logic of Real Arguments, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(Orig 1988)
Fiss, Peer C. (2007) "A Set-Theoretic Approach to Organizational Configurations," The
Academy of Management Review 32(4): 1180-1198.
Flick, Uwe (1992) "Triangulation Revisited: Strategy of Validation or Alternative?" Journal
for the Theory of Social Behaviour 22(2): 169-197.
Flora, David B., and Patrick J. Curran (2004) An Empirical Evaluation of Alternative
Methods of Estimation for Confirmatory Factor Analysis With Ordinal Data,
Psychological Methods, 9:4, 466 – 491.
Flyvbjerg, Bent (2011) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How it
Can Succeed Again, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Frank, Ove, and Termeh Shafie (2016) Multivariate Entropy Analysis of Network Data,
Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique Vol. 129, pages 45–63.
Freitag, Marcus, and Raphaela Schlicht (2009) Educational Federalism in Germany:
Foundations of Social Inequality in Education. Governance: An International Journal
of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 22(1), 47–72.
Funnell, Sue, and Patricia J. Rogers (2011) Purposeful Program Theory: Effective use of
theories of change and logic models. Sydney: Jossey-Bass.
Gelman, Andrew, and Jennifer Hill (2007) Data Analysis Using Regression and
Multilevel/Hierarchical Models, Analytical Methods for Social Research Series,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in
the Social Sciences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gerring, John (2007) Case Study Research: Principles and Practices, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gerring, John (2012) Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Goertz, Gary (2017) Multimethod Research, Causal Mechanisms, and Case-Studies: An
Integrated Approach, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gomm, Roger, Martyn Hammersley, and Peter Foster, eds. (2000) Case Study Method.
London: Sage.
Granger, Clive W.J., ed. (1990) Modelling Economic Series: Readings in Econometric

13
 Methodology, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Greenacre, Michael, and Jorg Blasius, editors (2006) Multiple Correspondence Analysis and
Related Methods (Series: Chapman & Hall/CRC Statistics in the Social and
Behavioral Sciences), London: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Greene J.C., Caracelli V.J. (1997) Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges
and Benefits of -Integrating Diverse Paradigms (New Directions for Evaluation, 74).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Greene, Jennifer C. (2007) Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry, San Francisco: John Wiley &
Sons (via Jossey-Bass Publishers).
Hala Abou-Ali, Hesham El-Azony, Heba El-Laithy, Jonathan Haughton & Shahid Khandker
(2010) Evaluating the impact of Egyptian Social Fund for Development programmes,
Journal of Development Effectiveness, 2:4, 521-555, DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2010.529926
Hamilton, Lawrence C. (2006) Statistics with Stata, Brooks.
Harding, S. (1995) ‘Can Feminist Thought Make Economics More Objective?’, Feminist
Economics 1, 1: 7-32.
Harding, Sandra (1999) "The Case for Strategic Realism: A Response to Lawson", Feminist
Economics, 5:3, pp. 127-133.
Harriss-White, Barbara, Wendy Olsen, Penny Vera-Sanso and V. Suresh. (2013) "Multiple
Shocks and Slum Household Economies in South India." Economy and Society, 42:3,
398-429.
Heale, R., and D. Forbes (2013) “Research Made Simple: Understanding triangulation in
research”, Evidence-Based Nursing, 16:4, 98-*, doi: 10.1136/eb-2013-101494.
Hendry, D.F., and J. Richard (1990) “On the Formulation of Empirical Models in Dynamic
Econometrics”, Ch. 14 in Granger, ed., 1990.
Hill, E. (2001) "Women in the Indian informal economy: Collective strategies for work life
improvement and development." Work Employment and Society 15(3): 443-464.
Hox, Joop, Mirjam Moerbeek, and Rens Van De Schoot (2017) Multilevel Analysis:
Techniques and Applications, Third Edition (Quantitative Methodology Series),
London: Routledge.
Huang, R. (2011) QCA3: Yet another package for qualitative comparative analysis. R
package version 0.0-4. Pp 88.
Hughes, John, and Wes Sharrock (1997) The Philosophy of Social Research, 3rd ed., London:
Longman.
Indian book* * [Cite Book*]on delhi construction and sewa workers.
International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and Macro International. 2007. National
Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), 2005–06: India: Volume II, Mumbai: IIPS. pp.18-
19.
Kabeer, N. (1994) Reversed Realities, Delhi: Kali for Women and London: Verso.
Kabeer, Naila (1998) "’Money Can’t Buy Me Love’? Re-Evaluating Gender, Credit and
Empowerment in Rural Bangladesh", IDS Discussion Paper No. 363, Institute of
Development Studies, Univ. of Sussex.
Kabeer, Naila, Lopita Huq, and Simeen Mahmud (2013) Diverging stories of “missing
women” in South Asia: is son preference weakening in Bangladesh? Feminist
Economics, 20:4, 1-26, DOI 10.1080/13545701.2013.857423
Kanjilal-Bhaduri, Sanghamitra, and Francesca Pastore (2018), Returns to Education and
Female Participation Nexus: Evidence from India, The Indian Journal of Labour
Economics (2018) 61:515–536. DOI: 10.1007/s41027-018-0143-2.
Kaplan, David (2009). Structural Equation Modeling: Foundations and extensions. 2nd ed.
Los Angeles, London: Sage.

14
Kelly, Erin L., Phyllis Moen and Eric Tranby (2011) Changing Workplaces to Reduce Work-
Family Conflict: Schedule Control in a White-Collar Organization, American
Sociological Review, 76:2, 265–290: DOI: 10.1177/0003122411400056.
Kent, Raymond, Chapter 15 of R. Kent (2007), Marketing Research: Approaches, Methods
and Applications in Europe, London: Thomson Learning.
Kvale, Steiner (1996) InterViews, London: Sage.
Lacey, Hugh (1999) Is Science Value Free? Values and scientific understanding, London:
Routledge.
Lacobucci, Dawn, 2008, Mediation Analysis Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social
Sciences, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lam, W. Wai Fung and Elinor Ostrom (2010), “Analyzing the dynamic complexity of
development interventions: lessons from an irrigation experiment in Nepal, Policy
Science, 43:1, pp. 1-25. DOI 10.1007/s11077-009-9082-6 .
Lang, Peter, 2014, Bourdieu and Data Analysis Methodological Principles and Practice,
Bern: International Academic Publishers.
Lawson, T. (1997) Economics and Reality, London: Routledge.
Lawson, T. (2003) Reorienting Economics, London and New York: Routledge.
Layder, Derek (1993) New Strategies in Social Research, Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
Also Repr. 1995, 1996, Oxford: Polity Press.
Layder, Derek (1998) 'The Reality of Social Domains: Implications for Theory and Method",
ch. 6 in May and Williams, eds. (1998), pp. 86-102.
Lee, Wang-Sheng, and Cahit Guven (2013), Engaging in Corruption: The Influence of
Cultural Values and Contagion Effects at the Micro Level, IZA Working Paper No.
7685.
Lemon, Mark (2003) Exploring Environmental Change Using an Integrative Method,
Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Letherby, Gail, John Scott and Malcolm Williams (2012), Objectivity and Subjectivity,
London: Sage.
Lewins, Ann, and Silver, Christina, 2007, Using Software in Qualitative Research Step-By-
Step Guide, London: Sage Publications.
Lewis, P. A. (2000). Realism, Causality and the Problem of Social Structure, Journal for the
Theory of Social Behavior 30: 249–268.
Longest, Kyle C., and Stephen Vaisey (2008). "Fuzzy: A program for Performing Qualitative
Comparative Analyses (QCA) in Stata,” Stata Journal, 8 (1):79-104.
Lopez, Jose J. and Scott, John (2000) Concepts in the Social Sciences, Social Structure,
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Lucas, Samuel R., and Alisa Szatrowski (2014) Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Critical
Perspective, Sociological Methodology 44:1-79.
Maxwell J.A., Loomis D.M. (2003) Mixed Methods Design: An alternative approach. In:
Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and
Behavioral Research, pp 241–272. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Maxwell, J., & Mittapalli, K. (2010) Realism as a stance for mixed methods research. In A.
Tashakkori, & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and
Behavioural Research (2nd ed., pp. 145–167). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DOI:
10.4135/9781506335193
Maxwell, Joseph A. (2012) A Realist Approach for Qualitative Research, London: Sage.
Maxwell, Scott E., and David A. Cole (2007) Bias in Cross-Sectional Analyses of
Longitudinal Mediation, Psychological Methods, 12:1, 23-44.
McKinnon, D. P. (2008) Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis, NY: Lawrence
Erlbaum and Associates.

15
McNiff, Jean, and A. Whitehead (2011) All You Need to Know About Action Research, 2nd
ed., London: Sage.
Mearman, A. (2006) "Critical Realism in Economics and Open-Systems Ontology: A
critique." Review of Social Economy 64(1): 47 - 75.
Menard, Scott (1995) Applied Logistic Regression Analysis, Sage Series Quantitative
Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 106, London and Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Mendel, Jerry M., and Mohammad M. Korjani (2012) Ragin’s fsQCA Used for Linguistic
Summarizations, Information Sciences 202, 1-23 DOI: http://dx.doi.o
rg/10.1016/j.ins.2012.02.039.
Mendel, Jerry M., and Mohammad M. Korjani (2018) A new method for calibrating the fuzzy
sets used in fsQCA, Information Sciences 468 (2018) 155–171, DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.ins.2018.07.050.
Miles, Huberman 1984, 1994**
Mills, Charles W. (1959) The Sociological Imagination. NY: Oxford University Press.
Morgan, paper on causes in future forecasting
Morgan, book on liquidity, Palgrave.
Morgan, J., and W.K. Olsen (2011) “Aspiration Problems for the Indian Rural Poor: Research
on Self-Help Groups and Micro-Finance”, Capital and Class, June, 35:2, 189-212,
doi: 10.1177/0309816811402646;
Mukherjee, Dipa (2012) Schooling, Child Labor, and Reserve Army: Evidences from India,
Journal of Developing Societies, Vol 28(1): 1–29. DOI:
10.1177/0169796X1102800101.
Muthén, B. & Kaplan, D. (1985) A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis
of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical
Psychology, 38, 171-189.
Muthen, B. (1983) “Latent Variable Structural Equation Modeling with Categorical Data”,
Journal of Econometrics, 22, pages 43-65.
Muthen, B. (1984) A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered
categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators, Psychometrica, 49:1, 115-132.
Muthén, L.K., and B. Muthén (2006) MPLUS: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables:
User’s Guide. 4th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén and Muthén.
National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Mitra and Associates, and
Macro International (2009) Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2007.
National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Mitra and Associates, and
ICF International (2013) Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2011.
Neff, D., and Olsen. W. (2007) "Measuring Subjective Well-Being From A Realist
Viewpoint", Methodological Innovations Online 2:2.
O’Cathain, A., E. Murphy, and J. Nicholl (2010) “Three Techniques for Integrating Data in
Mixed Methods Studies”, British Medical Journal, 341, doi: 10.1136/bmj.c4587
Olsen, Wendy (2003) Triangulation, Time, and the Social Objects of Econometrics, chapter 9
in Downward, Paul, ed. (2003), Applied Economics and the Critical Realist Critique,
London: Routledge.
Olsen, Wendy (2006) “Pluralism, Poverty and Sharecropping: Cultivating Open-Mindedness
in Development Studies”, Journal of Development Studies, 42:7, pgs. 1130-1157.
Olsen, Wendy (2007) “Pluralist Methodology for Development Economics”, Journal of
Economic Methodology, 14:1, 57-82.
Olsen, Wendy (2009a) Non-Nested and Nested Cases in a Socio-Economic Village Study,
chapter in D. Byrne and C. Ragin, eds. (2009), Handbook of Case-Centred Research
Methods, London: Sage.

16
Olsen, Wendy (2009b) Beyond Sociology: Structure, Agency, and Strategy Among Tenants
in India, Asian Journal of Social Science, 37:3, 366-390.
Olsen, Wendy (2010) “Realist Methodology: A Review”, Chapter 1 in Olsen, W.K., ed.,
Realist Methodology, volume 1 of 4-volume set, Benchmarks in Social Research
Methods Series. London: Sage. Pages xix – xlvi.
Olsen, Wendy (2012) Data Collection: Key Trends and Methods in Social Research,
London: Sage.
Olsen, Wendy (2019b) “Bridging to Action Requires Mixed Methods, Not Only Randomised
Control Trials”, European Journal of Development Research, 31:2, 139-162, DOI
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41287-019-00201-x.
Olsen, Wendy (2019a) “Social Statistics Using Strategic Structuralism and Pluralism”, in
Contemporary Philosophy and Social Science: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue, edited
by Michiru Nagatsu and Attilia Ruzzene. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Olsen, Wendy (2014) “Comment: The Usefulness of QCA Under Realist Assumptions”,
Sociological Methodology, 44, DOI 10.1177/0081175014542080, July, pgs. 101-107.
Olsen, Wendy, and Jamie Morgan (2005) A Critical Epistemology Of Analytical Statistics:
Addressing the sceptical realist, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35:3,
255-284.
Olsen, Wendy, and Jamie Morgan (2010) “Institutional Change From Within the Informal
Sector in Indian Rural Labour Relations”, International Review of Sociology, 20:3,
535-553, DOI:10.1080/03906701.2010.51190.
Olsen, Wendy, and Min Zhang (2015) How To Statistically Test Attitudes Over Space:
Answers From the Gender Norms Project, Briefing Paper 3, Gender Norms Project,
Creative Commons license, University of Manchester.
Olsen, Wendy, and Smita Mehta (2006a) “The Right to Work and Differentiation in Indian
Employment”, Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 49:3, July-Sept., 2006, pages
389-406.
Olsen, Wendy, and Smita Mehta (2006b) A pluralist account of labour participation in India.
Online mimeo, GPRG-WPS-042. URL
http://www.gprg.org/pubs/workingpapers/pdfs/gprg-wps-042.pdf, accessed Jan 2019.
Outhwaite, William (1987) New Philosophies of Social Science: Realism, Hermeneutics and
Critical Theory, London: Macmillan.
Parboteea et al (2005) “Does National Culture Affect Willingness to Justify Ethically Suspect
Behaviours?”, International Journal of CrossCultural Management, 5:2, 123-138.
Patel V., Araya R., Chowdhary N,. et al. (2008) Detecting Common Mental Disorders in
Primary Care in India: A Comparison of Five Screening Questionnaires,
Psychological Medicine 38, 221-228.
Pawson, Ray, and Nick Tilley (1997) Realistic Evaluation. Sage: London.
Paynes, Geoff, and Payne, Judy (2004) Key Concepts in Social Research, London: Sage
Publications.
Plano Clark, V. L. and J. W. Creswell, eds. (2008) The Mixed Methods Reader. London:
Sage.
Porpora, Douglas V. (2015) Reconstructing Sociology: The Critical Realist Approach,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Potter, Garry (2000) The Philosophy of Social Science New Perspectives, Essex: Pearson
Education Limited.
Quine, W. V. O. (1953) Two Dogmas of Empiricism From a Logical Point of View. Boston,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Rabe-Hesketh, Sophia, and Brian Everitt (2009) A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using
STATA, London: Chapman and Hall/CRC.

17
Ragin Charles C. and John Sonnett (2005) "Between Complexity and Parsimony: Limited
Diversity, Counterfactual Cases, and Comparative Analysis. Pp. 180-197 in Sabine
Kropp and Michael Minkenberg (eds.), Vergleichen in der Politikwissenschaft.
Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften.
Ragin, C. C. (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative
strategies. Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of California Press.
Ragin, C. C. (2000) Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.
Ragin, C., (2009) Reflections on Casing and Case-Oriented Research, pp 522-534 in Byrne,
D., and C. Ragin, eds. (2009), Handbook of Case-Centred Research Methods,
London: Sage.
Ragin, Charles (2008a) Redesigning Social Enquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Ragin, Charles C. (2008b) "Calibration Versus Measurement." in David Collier, Henry
Brady, and Janet Box-Steffensmeier (eds.), Methodology volume of Oxford
Handbooks of Political Science.
Ragin, Charles C. (2006) "Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency
and Coverage. Political Analysis 14(3):291-310. click here to download this paper
Ragin, Charles C. (2008) "Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using Fuzzy Sets (fsQCA)." Pp.
87-121 in Benoit Rihoux and Charles Ragin (eds.) Configurational Comparative
Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA and London: Sage Publications. See
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~cragin/fsQCA/software.shtml for an open access copy.
Ragin, Charles, and Sean Davey (2014) fs/QCA [Computer Programme], Version [3.0].
Irvine, CA: University of California. The instructions for loading are at:
http://www.compasss.org/software.htm#fsQCA, accessed July 2017.
Raman, Vasanthi (2010) The Warp and the Weft: Community and Gender Identity Among
Banaras Weavers, New Delhi: Routledge.
Ramirez, Ricardo, and Quarry, Wendy (2009) Communication For Another Development:
Listening Before Telling, London: Zed Books Ltd.
Rasbash, J., Steele, F., Browne, W. and Goldstein, H. (2009) A User’s Guide to MLwiN,
Version 2.10. Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol.
Rihoux, B. (2006) Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and related systematic
comparative methods: recent advances and remaining challenges for social science
research. International Sociology, 21(5), 679-706.
Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. (2009) Configurational comparative methods. Qualitative
Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques (Series in Applied Social
Research Methods). Thousand Oaks and London: Sage.
Rihoux, B., and Gisele de Meur (2009) Crisp-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis
(csQCA), in Benoit Rihoux and C. Ragin, eds., 2009, Configurational Comparative
Methods: QCA and Related Techniques (Applied Social Research Methods).
Thousand Oaks and London: Sage.
Rihoux, B., and M. Grimm, eds. (2006) Innovative Comparative Methods For Policy
Analysis: Beyond the quantitative-qualitative divide. New York, NY, Springer.
Robson, C. (2001) 2nd edn. Real World Research, Oxford: Blackwell.
Rogers, Carl (*) Rogerian arguments*
Rohlfing, Ingo (2008) What you See and What You Get: Pitfalls and Principles of Nested
Analysis in Comparative Research, Comparative Political Studies, 41: 1492-1514.
Rohlfing, Ingo (2016) Case Studies and Causal Inference: An Integrative Framework .
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
Rosenbaum, Paul R., and Donald B. Rubin (1983), The Central Role of the Propensity Score
in Observational Studies for Causal Effects, Biometrika, 70:1, pp. 41-55. URL

18
 http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0006-
3444%28198304%2970%3A1%3C41%3ATCROTP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q
Rosenberg, Alexander (1995) Philosophy of Social Science, Oxford: Harper Collins
Publishers.
Roth, Paul A. Meaning and Method in the Social Sciences: A Case for Methodological
Pluralism. Cornell University Press, 1987. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctvr696hr.
Savage, Silva, Warde and Gayo-Cal and Wright (2009) Culture, Class, Distinction, London:
Routledge.
Sayer, Andrew (2000) Realism and Social Science. London: Sage.
Sayer, Andrew (1992 (orig. 1984)) Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. London,
Routledge.

Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, Claudius (2006) Reducing complexity in Qualitative

Comparative Analysis (QCA): remote and proximate factors and the consolidation of
democracy. European Journal of Political Research, 45(5), 751-786.
Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, Claudius (2012) Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social
Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. (Original in German 2007)
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shidhaya, Rahul, and Vikram Patel (2010) Association of Socio-Economic, Gender and
Health Factors With Common Mental Disorders in Women: A Population-Based
Study of 5703 Married Rural Women in India, International Journal of Epidemiology,
39: 1510-1521.
Silge, Julia, and Robinson, David (2017) Text Mining With R, Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media,
Silva, Warde and Wright (2007) Using Mixed Methods for Analysing Culture: The Cultural
Capital and Social Exclusion Project, Cultural Sociology, 3:2, July, pages 299-316,
DOI: 10.1177/1749975509105536.
Smith, Mark (1998) Social Science in Question, Sage in association with Open Univ.,
London.
Smithson, M. and J. Verkuilen (2006) Fuzzy Set Theory: Applications in the social sciences.
Thousand Oaks, London: Sage Publications.
Snijders, Tom A.B., and Roel Bosker (2011) Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction To Basic
And Advanced Multilevel Modeling, 2nd rev. ed., London: Sage.
Snow, David A., and Michael Mulcahy (2001) Space, Politics, and the Survival Strategies of
the Homeless, American Behavioral Scientist, 45:1, 149-169.
Steele, Fiona (2008) Introduction to Multilevel Modelling MLwiN Practicals, Bristol:
University of Bristol, Central for Multi-level Modelling, URL
https://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/cmm/migrated/documents/5-practicals-
mlwin-sample.pdf, accessed July, 2019.
Tanner, Sean (2014) QCA is of Questionable Value For Policy Research, Policy and Society,
33:3, 287-298, DOI: 10.1016/j.polsoc.2014.08.003.
Tashakkori A and Teddlie C. (1998) Mixed Methodology. Combining Qualitative and
Quantitative Approaches, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Tashakkori A., Teddlie C. (2003) The Past and Future of Mixed Methods Research: From
data triangulation to mixed model designs. In: Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (eds)
Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research., pp 671–701. Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA
Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C., eds. (2003) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and
Behavioral Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

19
Taylor D.L., Tashakkori A. (1997) Toward an Understanding of Teachers’ Desire for
Participation in Decision Making. Journal of School Leadership 7: 1–20.
Teddlie C., Tashakkori A. (2003) Major Issues and Controversies in the Use of Mixed
Methods in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. In: Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (eds)
Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research., pp 3–50. Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA
Teddlie, Charles, and Abbas Tashakkori (2009) Foundations of Mixed Methods Research,
London: Sage.
Thiem, Alrik, and Duşa, Adrian, (2013a) Qualitative Comparative Analysis with R: A User’s
Guide, London: Springer.
Thiem, Alrik and Adrian Duşa (2013b) QCA: A Package for Qualitative Comparative
Analysis, The R Journal, Vol. 5/1, June.
Thomann, Eva, and Martino Maggetti (2017), Designing Research With Qualitative
Comparative Analysis (QCA): Approaches, Challenges, and Tools, Sociological
Methods Research, XX(X), 1-31, DOI: 10.1177/0049124117729700
Thorat, Sukhadeo, and Nidhi Sadana Sabharwal (2010) Caste and Social Exclusion Issues
Related to Concept, Indicators and Measurement, Indian Institute of Dalit Studies,
Delhi. Working Paper 02:01. URL
http://www.dalitstudies.org.in/uploads/publication/1516704884.pdf
Touri, M., and N. Koteyko (2014) “Using Corpus Linguistic Software in the Extraction of
News Frames: Towards a dynamic process of frame analysis in journalistic texts”,
International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18:6, 601-616, DOI:
10.1080/13645579.2014.929878
UK Aid Connect (2018) Guidance Note: Developing a Theory of Change. Accessed 2019,
URL
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5964b5dd40f0b60a4000015b/UK-Aid-
Connect-Theory-of-Change-Guidance.pdf.
Ullman, J. (2006), ch. 17 of Tabachnick and Fidell on structural equation models, NY:
Harper Collins: Ullman, J. (2006), ch. 17 of Tabachnick and Fidell, 2006 edition of
their 1996 book (online only). See also almost the same text as Journal Of Personality
Assessment, 87(1), 35–50, Statistical Developments And Applications, URL
file:///C:/o/Te/LFA/Ullman%20%20Structural%20equation%20modeling.Ch17.Ullma
n2006.pdf, Accessed Sept. 2016. See also the earlier edition, where Ullman’s chapter
is printed with the rest of the book, Ullman, J. B. (2001). Structural Equation
Modeling. In Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L. S., (2001) Eds., Using Multivariate
Statistics (4th Ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
UNDP/Hivos (2011) Theory of Change. A Thinking and Action Approach to Navigate in the
complexity of social change processes. Author Iñigo R Eguren. For Hivos, The
Netherlands, and the UNDP Regional Centre for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Van Staveren, Irena (2014) Economics After the Crisis: An Introduction to Economics from a
Pluralist and Global Perspective, 1st Edition, London: Routledge.
Vatrapu, Ravi, Raghava Rao Mukkamala, Abid Hussain, And Benjamin Flesch (2015) Social
Set Analysis: A Set Theoretical Approach to Big Data Analytics, IEEE Access, April
28, DOI 10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2559584.
Vis, Barbara (2012) The Comparative Advantages of fsQCA and Regression Analysis for
Moderately Large-N Analyses, Sociological Methods & Research, 41(1) 168–198,
DOI: 10.1177/0049124112442142.
Vis, Barbara (2009) Governments and unpopular social policy reform: Biting the bullet or
steering clear?, European Journal of Political Research, 48: 31–57.

20
Walby, Sylvia (2001) ‘Against Epistemological Chasms: The Science Question in Feminism
Revisited’, Signs 26, 2: 485-509.
Watson, Samantha K., and Mark Elliot (2015), Entropy balancing: a maximum-entropy
reweighting, Quality and Quantity 50(4):1-17. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-015-0235-8
Weston, A. (2002) A Rulebook For Arguments (4th ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co,
Inc.
Williams, M. (2000) Science And Social Science: An Introduction. London; New York,
Routledge.
Woodward, Phil (2012) Bayesian Analysis Made Simple: An Excel GUI [Graphical User
Interface] for WinBUGS, CRC Press, Chapman and Hall.
World Values Survey 1981-2008 Official Aggregate v.20090901 (2009) World Values
Survey Association (www.worldvaluessurvey.org). Aggregate File Producer:
ASEP/JDS, Madrid.

21