Social Network Analysis and Qualitative Comparative Analysis: Their mutual benefit for the explanation of policy network structures

By switching the level of analysis and aggregating data from the micro-level of individual cases to the macro-level, quantitative data can be analysed within a more case-based approach. This paper presents such an approach in two steps: In a first step, it discusses the combination of Social Network Analysis (SNA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in a sequential mixed-methods research design. In such a design, quantitative social network data on individual cases and their relations at the micro-level are used to describe the structure of the network that these cases constitute at the macro-level. Different network structures can then be compared by QCA. This strategy allows adding an element of potential causal explanation to SNA, while SNA-indicators allow for a systematic description of the cases to be compared by QCA. Because mixing methods can be a promising, but also a risky endeavour, the methodological part also discusses the possibility that underlying assumptions of both methods could clash. In a second step, the research design presented beforehand is applied to an empirical study of policy network structures in Swiss politics. Through a comparison of 11 policy networks, causal paths that lead to a conflictual or consensual policy network structure are identified and discussed. The analysis reveals that different theoretical factors matter and that multiple conjunctural causation is at work. Based on both the methodological discussion and the empirical application, it appears that a combination of SNA and QCA can represent a helpful methodological design for social science research and a possibility of using quantitative data with a more case-based approach.

Assessing collective defensive performances in football: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of central back pairs

Ahead of the World Cup in Brazil the crucial question for the Swiss national coach is the nomination of the starting eleven central back pair. A fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis assesses the defensive performances of different Swiss central back pairs during the World Cup campaign (2011 – 2014). This analysis advises Ottmar Hitzfeld to nominate Steve von Bergen and Johan Djourou as the starting eleven central back pair. The alternative with a substantially weaker empirical validity would be Johan Djourou together with Phillippe Senderos. Furthermore, this paper aims to be a step forward in mainstream football analytics. It analyses the undervalued and understudied defense (Anderson and Sally 2012, Statsbomb 2013) by explaining collective defensive performances instead of assessments of individual player or team performances. However, a qualitatively (better defensive metrics) and quantitatively (more games) improved and extended data set would allow for a more sophisticated analysis of collective defensive performances.

Is output performance all about the resources? A fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of street-level bureaucrats in Switzerland

This article refines Lipsky’s (1980) assertion that lacking resources negatively affect output performance. It uses fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to analyse the nuanced interplay of contextual and individual determinants of the output performance of veterinary inspectors as street-level bureaucrats in Switzerland. Moving ‘beyond Lipsky’, the study builds on recent theoretical contributions and a systematic comparison across organizational contexts. Against a widespread assumption, output performance is not all about the resources. The impact of perceived available resources hinges on caseloads, which prove to be more decisive. These contextual factors interact with individual attitudes emerging from diverse public accountabilities. The results contextualize the often-emphasized importance of worker-client interaction. In a setting where clients cannot escape the interaction, street-level bureaucrats are not primarily held accountable by them. Studies of output performance should thus sensibly consider gaps between what is being demanded of and offered to street-level bureaucrats, and the latter’s multiple embeddedness.

Why Do Some Water Utilities Recycle More than Others? A Qualitative Comparative Analysis in New South Wales, Australia

Although the recycling of municipal wastewater can play an important role in water supply security and ecosystem protection, the percentage of wastewater recycled is generally low and strikingly variable. Previous research has employed detailed case studies to examine the factors that contribute to recycling success but usually lacks a comparative perspective across cases. In this study, 25 water utilities in New South Wales, Australia, were compared using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA). This research method applies binary logic and set theory to identify the minimal combinations of conditions that are necessary and/or sufficient for an outcome to occur within the set of cases analyzed. The influence of six factors (rainfall, population density, coastal or inland location, proximity to users; cost recovery and revenue for water supply services) was examined for two outcomes, agricultural use and "heavy" (i.e., commercial/municipal/industrial) use. Each outcome was explained by two different pathways, illustrating that different combinations of conditions are associated with the same outcome. Generally, while economic factors are crucial for heavy use, factors relating to water stress and geographical proximity matter most for agricultural reuse. These results suggest that policies to promote wastewater reuse may be most effective if they target uses that are most feasible for utilities and correspond to the local context. This work also makes a methodological contribution through illustrating the potential utility of fsQCA for understanding the complex drivers of performance in water recycling.

Statistical shape modeling of pathological scoliotic vertebrae: A comparative analysis

Statistical shape models (SSMs) have been used widely as a basis for segmenting and interpreting complex anatomical structures. The robustness of these models are sensitive to the registration procedures, i.e., establishment of a dense correspondence across a training data set. In this work, two SSMs based on the same training data set of scoliotic vertebrae, and registration procedures were compared. The first model was constructed based on the original binary masks without applying any image pre- and post-processing, and the second was obtained by means of a feature preserving smoothing method applied to the original training data set, followed by a standard rasterization algorithm. The accuracies of the correspondences were assessed quantitatively by means of the maximum of the mean minimum distance (MMMD) and Hausdorf distance (H(D)). Anatomical validity of the models were quantified by means of three different criteria, i.e., compactness, specificity, and model generalization ability. The objective of this study was to compare quasi-identical models based on standard metrics. Preliminary results suggest that the MMMD distance and eigenvalues are not sensitive metrics for evaluating the performance and robustness of SSMs.

Intravenous versus intra-articular delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the hip joint: a comparative analysis

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether T1-mapping of hip joint with intra-articular delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of cartilage (ia-dGEMRIC) is comparable to the already established intravenous (iv)-technique for assessing different grades of cartilage degeneration.