This paper analyzes the working or default assumptions researchers in the formal, statistical, and case study traditions typically hold regarding the sources of unexplained variance, the meaning of outliers, parameter values, human motivation, functional forms, time, and external validity. We argue that these working assumptions are often not essential to each method, and that these assumptions can be relaxed in ways that allow multimethod work to proceed. We then analyze the comparative advantages of different combinations of formal, statistical, and case study methods for various theory-building and theory-testing research objectives. We illustrate these advantages and offer methodological advice on how to combine different methods, through analysis and critique of prominent examples of multimethod research.
翻译:本文分析了正式、统计和案例研究中的工作假设或默认假设研究人员通常持有的关于无法解释的差异来源、外部值、参数值、人类动机、功能形式、时间和外部有效性等含义的工作假设或默认假设。我们认为,这些工作假设往往不是每种方法都必不可少的,这些假设可以放松,允许开展多种方法工作。然后,我们分析了各种理论建设和理论测试研究目标的正式、统计和案例研究方法的不同组合的相对优势。我们说明了这些优势,并就如何通过分析和评论多种方法研究的突出例子,将不同方法结合起来,提出了方法建议。