Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Division
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Current discussions about the state of comparative research suggests the field is characterized by a methodological imbalance (i.e., many quantitative studies, few qualitative ones). This paper suggests the problem is better understood as an epistemological imbalance. We suggest that one epistemology—we call it “universalism”—underpins much comparative scholarship. While this approach produces numerous comparative insights, it also struggles to adequately account for the diversity of contexts it studies. We therefore describe an alternative epistemology, which we term “contextualism,” which aims to identify the mechanisms or principles that link cases across contexts. We suggest that progress in the field depends in part on the co-existence of multiple epistemologies, each with careful awareness of its strengths and limitations.