On the importance of teaching robust work using qualitative methods in the social sciences

One of my biggest pet peeves is how we end up rehashing discussions all the time about the same topics. I feel forced to write Twitter threads and blog posts about the validity, rigor and importance of qualitative research on a regular basis, particularly because for some scholars, qualitative work appears to be considered “easy”. The relatively recent popularity of quantitative and experimental approaches in political science combined with an apparent belief that qualitative research is less relevant/rigorous/well done than quantitative work seem to be two factors that influence uptake and popularity of qualitative research methods in political science.

A recent article in PS: Politics titled Graduate Qualitative Methods Training in Political Science: A Disciplinary Crisis by Cassandra Emmons and Andrew Moravcsik reports that there appears to be a dearth of training in qualitative methods in the political science field at many universities. I really don’t have much time to discuss it in detail so both this post and my Twitter thread only discuss two aspects of the debate: the importance of teaching qualitative methods and of publishing good qualitative work.

I admit that I DO have a stake in the development of qualitative methods as a field.

Suggestions on qualitative research methods’ articles and books for graduate students https://t.co/OnuWvBMS1Q (I edit a qualitative methods journal, I teach qualitative methods, I have published methods pieces. Trust me when I make the suggestions posted on this blog).

— Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) December 21, 2019

My Twitter thread draws from my experience here in Mexico. While I do field research all over the world, I do have a lot of work that focuses on Mexico, and as a result, I need to read scholarship in the Spanish language. In my experience reading a lot of the Spanish-language stuff that is being published in Mexico (and A TON of what’s published in English worldwide), it seems to me as though people are teaching that “qualitative methods is everything that is not quantitative methods”.

WRONG.

There are qualitative methods that we can use to seek to establish causation and trace causal mechanisms (see Derek Beach, @IRgetsreal @TheDapperChef and more for a discussion on the topic, from process tracing to causal case studies).

The problem is, I believe…

— Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) December 20, 2019

… the right PhD dissertation strategy https://t.co/0leWmqkrCn

I tend to agree with Chris, and I am not surprised about the popularity of RCTs/field experiments. They ARE amazing tools. But I think we ought to teach the right tool for the problem we are seeking to tackle.

— Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) December 20, 2019

Like with any other method, poorly done qualitative methods-based research will generate a bad impression and I am not surprised about it. I’ve criticized this kind of work before. But there’s poorly done quantitative research too.

There’s this impression that because it’s…

— Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) December 20, 2019

Find robust, well-done qualitative research and teach THAT.

And to those of us who DO use qualitative methods, let’s try to do our best work and showcase rigour, transparency, the promise and power but also the limitations of the methods we use.

</fin>

— Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) December 20, 2019

The conversation on research methods and qualitative vs. quantitative is far from over, and I am hoping this blog post will contribute to the discussion too.

You can share this blog post on the following social networks by clicking on their icon.