Rethinking Presidential Challenges and Falls : A Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Charles Ragin and proponents of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) make strong claims about the strengths of QCA when contrasted with conventional variable-oriented research. Most importantly, Ragin argues that QCA is better capable (and perhaps uniquely capable) of assessing causal complexity, “defined as a situation in which an outcome may follow from several different combinations of causal conditions” (Ragin 2008a: 23). It is also claimed that QCA can bring to light heterogeneity in a population of cases that is obscured by conventional statistical techniques. My essay seeks to evaluate these methodological claims by contrasting qualitative and quantitative approaches as applied to a critical substantive issue in South American politics, namely presidential falls - i.e., the premature departure from office of elected presidents. This is accomplished by re-analyzing the data from Kathryn Hochstetler's (2006) important contribution on the subject which draws some of its key inferences from quantitative regression. The application of QCA to Hochstetler's data also yields new substantive insights into presidential challenges and falls that further bring into focus the distinctive strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative approaches