上市(财务)
定性比较分析
计算机科学
质量(理念)
指南
管理科学
订单(交换)
风险分析(工程)
模糊逻辑
工程伦理学
医学
认识论
人工智能
工程类
政治学
业务
机器学习
法学
哲学
财务
作者
Carsten Q. Schneider,Claudius Wagemann
出处
期刊:Comparative Sociology
[Brill]
日期:2010-01-01
卷期号:9 (3): 397-418
被引量:978
标识
DOI:10.1163/156913210x12493538729793
摘要
Abstract As a relatively new methodological tool, QCA is still a work in progress. Standards of good practice are needed in order to enhance the quality of its applications. We present a list from A to Z of twenty-six proposals regarding what a “good” QCA-based research entails, both with regard to QCA as a research approach and as an analytical technique. Our suggestions are subdivided into three categories: criteria referring to the research stages before, during, and after the analytical moment of data analysis. This listing can be read as a guideline for authors, reviewers, and readers of QCA.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI