THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS OF COMPARATIVE SURVEY RESEARCH: WHY THE WHEEL OF CROSS-CULTURAL METHODOLOGY KEEPS ON BEING REINVENTED

Abstract

Reviewing the earlier literature on methodological issues in comparative research, the paper argues that `in terms of methodology in abstracto and on issues of research technology, most of all that needed to be said has already been published'. Yet the actual research falls short of this available knowledge. Famous publications based on comparative research are really promulgators of research artefacts. Three goals are being emphasised: (a) to counteract the tendency to reinvent the methodological wheel; (b) to help with ex post interpretations of data from cross-national research; (c) to use the difficulties and pay-offs in comparisons for substantive insights. Thus, `Galton's problem' - treating countries as independent cases - forces an evaluation of the pervasiveness of diffusion vs. cultural/national identity. The low stability of many measures requires rethinking the meaning of one-point measurements. Comparative surveys are by implication cross-level research. Therefore, the use of country names as explanans requires theoretical notions about the nation as context for actors and institutions.