Qualitative Research Methods: Process Tracing

Focusing on qualitative research methods, specifically process tracing and causal mechanisms, the lecture will build upon previous discussions of cases and case studies.
A key theoretical reading is Beach & Pedersen (2019).
Practical application is provided by Winward's (2021) research on Indonesia.
The date of the lecture is November 8, 2024.

Process tracing is a method for analyzing causal mechanisms through detailed, case-specific empirical analysis.
Three key components comprise process tracing:
- Identifying the causal mechanism: The process between a cause and its outcome. This theoretical understanding is crucial.
- Tracing the mechanism: This involves observing the "empirical fingerprints" or "traces" left by the mechanism.
- Generalization: Applying insights from the case study, considering which types of cases are likely to exhibit similar processes. Generalization is not necessarily objective. A comparative approach might be necessary. Understanding the causal process within each case is key.

Causal mechanisms describe the processes that occur between a cause and its effect.
They are distinct from the cause itself in an analytical sense.
Within the cause-effect relation, a causal mechanism is identifiable as something initiated by the cause and leading to the outcome of interest.
Causal mechanisms are not simply descriptions of events; rather, they should explain the process in a productive or causal sense. This requires unpacking the reasons behind the outcomes, more than just reporting the sequence of events. Explaining the "why and how" is necessary.

Within-case analysis is dedicated to discovering the mechanisms' observable manifestations.
Detective work, by which the observable traces are sought is vital.
Thorough understanding of the theory is needed in order to identify whether a specific hypothesized mechanism is valid or not. By examining the causal mechanism in the case through various methods and data, one determines if the theory holds true or not.

Benjamin Brast's (2015) study on the regional dimensions of statebuilding interventions in Sierra Leone is presented as an application.
Statebuilding interventions are complex and multi-causal, often focusing too heavily on national and local actors, lacking a regional perspective.
Peer recognition from regional actors is critical for state stability.

Focus is on liberal statebuilding intervention.
Different parts of this specific intervention are analyzed.
Methods include unstructured interviews, official documents analysis, and statistical data. Combining these approaches with elite surveys or other experimental methods could be useful.

Further testing the mechanism in similar cases broadens the scope and increases generalization's validity.
Examining cases similar to the original case (Central Java)—as well as cases to which the findings may be applied. Asking different questions involving context conditions, under which the mechanism is demonstrated and in what other instances the same mechanisms might be valuable.
Causal heterogeneity (equifinality) and mechanistic heterogeneity should also be addressed in the generalization phase.

Process tracing strengthens the logic of social science research.
This approach illuminates contextual conditions relevant to the causal mechanisms.
The focus on contextual conditions allows for falsifiability—critical for theory refinement.

The narrow scope of some propositions might limit their generalizability.
The authors argue that contextualizing the propositions—and thus, detailing the specific mechanisms and their actions—would enhance the applicability in real-world contexts. The importance of considering contexts and contingencies in causal explanations are further highlighted in the case of medical trials.

Different approaches to process tracing cater to different research objectives. These approaches are detailed via the "table", and the table also provides concrete examples to highlight these various objectives and their research applications.

Winward (2021) explores the relationship between "state weakness" and state violence in Indonesia.

Note that this is not simply a variable, but rather a specific instantiation of a variable in a particular context.

Illustrative quantitative and qualitative data (regarding intelligence capacity, election results, and violence incidents) are used to identify whether the mechanism is manifest in a given case.
This is the phase for presenting data and supporting the legitimacy (or not) of the causal mechanism via various types of evidence. This data also plays an important role in identifying weaknesses or strengths in the hypothesis/theory.

The cause of violence—related to the specific intervention phase in Indonesia. Using five different indicators/measurements, both primary and secondary sources provide detailed analysis. Java is used as a case study, and the specific indicators and metrics are detailed to allow scrutiny and analysis of variations across different regions in Java.

Sources include semi-structured interviews, military documents, and archival materials.

Clear steps are presented regarding empirical implications across the various stages of the mechanism under investigation. The importance of having clearly defined steps and processes before conducting the analysis is emphasized.

Expanding on the results beyond the original example—showing how it applies elsewhere.
The case of selective violence—as opposed to indiscriminate violence—by state actors is examined. The limitations of the scope of study are highlighted, with territorial control as a necessary condition in some cases.