Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T19:51:58.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison with an Ethnographic Sensibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2017

Erica S. Simmons  and
Nicholas Rush Smith
Erica S. Simmons
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Nicholas Rush Smith
Affiliation:
City University of New York, City College
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
Symposium: Ethnography and Participant Observation: Political Science Research in this “Late Methodological Moment”
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 126 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2017 

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

Barth, Fredrik. 1969. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Beissinger, Mark R. 2002. Nationalist Mobilization and the Collapse of the Soviet State. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, Thad. 2012. Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences: A Design-Based Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L. and Bennett, Andrew. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gisselquist, Rachel M. 2014. “Paired Comparison and Theory Development: Considerations for Case Selection.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (2): 477–84.Google Scholar
Laitin, David D. 1986. Hegemony and Culture: Politics and Change among the Yoruba. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lawrence, Adria. 2013. Imperial Rule and the Politics of Nationalism: Anti-Colonial Protest in the French Empire. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, Richard and Thelen, Kathleen. 1995. “Contextualized Comparisons and the Study of Comparative Labor Politics.” Politics & Society 23 (3): 337–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madrid, Raúl L. 2012. The Rise of Ethnic Politics in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meierhenrich, Jens. 2008. The Legacies of Law: Long-Run Consequences of Legal Development in South Africa, 1650–2000. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pader, Ellen. 2006. “Seeing with an Ethnographic Sensibility.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Yanow, Dvora and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, 161–75. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Parkinson, Sarah. 2013. “Organizing Rebellion: Re-Thinking High-Risk Mobilization and Social Networks in War.” American Political Science Review 107 (3): 418–32.Google Scholar
Schatz, Edward. 2009. “Ethnographic Immersion and the Study of Politics.” In Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Politics, ed. Schatz, Edward, 1–22. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schwedler, Jillian. 2015. “Why Academics Can’t Get beyond Moderates and Radicals.” The Washington Post, February 12. Available at www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/02/12/why-academics-cant-get-beyond-moderates-and-radicals. Accessed May 5, 2015.Google Scholar
Sewell, William H. 2005. Logics of History: Social Theory and Social Transformation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Slater, Dan and Simmons, Erica. 2010. “Informative Regress: Critical Antecedents in Comparative Politics.” Comparative Political Studies 43 (7): 886–917.Google Scholar
Slater, Dan and Ziblatt, Daniel. 2013. “The Enduring Indispensability of the Controlled Comparison.” Comparative Political Studies 46 (10): 1301–27.Google Scholar
Snyder, Richard. 2001. “Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method.” Studies in Comparative International Development 36 (1): 93–110.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney. 2010. “The Strategy of Paired Comparison: Toward a Theory of Practice.” Comparative Political Studies 43 (2): 230–59.Google Scholar
Walsh, Katherine. 2004. Talking about Politics: Informal Groups and Social Identity in American Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wedeen, Lisa. 1999. Ambiguities of Domination: Politics, Rhetoric, and Symbols in Contemporary Syria. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wedeen, Lisa. 2002. “Conceptualizing Culture: Possibilities for Political Science.” American Political Science Review 96 (4): 713–28.Google Scholar
Wedeen, Lisa. 2008. Peripheral Visions: Publics, Power, and Performance in Yemen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Wimmer, Andreas. 2013. Ethnic Boundary Making: Institutions, Power, Networks. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, Elizabeth. 2003. Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yanow, Dvora. 2014. “Interpretive Analysis and Comparative Research.” In Comparative Policy Studies: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges, ed. Engeli, Isabelle and Allison, Christine Rothmayr, 131–59. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar