6.4 Most different systems design

Most different systems design is a comparative politics research method that identifies key explanatory variables by comparing vastly different cases with similar outcomes. It aims to eliminate irrelevant factors by focusing on commonalities across diverse contexts, assuming these shared elements are likely meaningful explanations.

This approach contrasts with most similar systems design, which compares similar cases. MDSD selects highly different cases to isolate robust variables that persist across contexts. It's useful for generating hypotheses about necessary conditions for outcomes, though it can be challenging to find truly different cases and may overlook important contextual nuances.

Definition of most different systems design

• Research design used in comparative politics to identify key explanatory variables by comparing very different cases that share a similar outcome
• Aims to eliminate irrelevant variables by focusing on the factors that remain constant across diverse contexts
• Assumes that any similarities found between highly different cases are likely to be meaningful explanations for the phenomenon under study

Key features of MDSD

Top images from around the web for Key features of MDSD

• 

  The Division of Powers – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Chapter 8: Comparative Politics – Politics, Power, and Purpose: An Orientation to Political Science View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Chapter 9: American Politics and Public Policy/Administration – Politics, Power, and Purpose: An ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Division of Powers – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Chapter 8: Comparative Politics – Politics, Power, and Purpose: An Orientation to Political Science View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Key features of MDSD

• 

  The Division of Powers – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Chapter 8: Comparative Politics – Politics, Power, and Purpose: An Orientation to Political Science View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Chapter 9: American Politics and Public Policy/Administration – Politics, Power, and Purpose: An ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Division of Powers – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Chapter 8: Comparative Politics – Politics, Power, and Purpose: An Orientation to Political Science View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Selects cases that are as different as possible in terms of potential explanatory variables (political systems, economic conditions, cultural factors)
• Requires that the chosen cases share a similar outcome or dependent variable of interest (regime stability, economic growth, social unrest)
• Analyzes cases systematically to identify the key factors that are consistently associated with the outcome across the different contexts
• Emphasizes the discovery of necessary conditions for a particular outcome rather than sufficient conditions

Assumptions behind MDSD approach

• The key explanatory variables will be robust enough to exert an effect on the outcome variable despite vast differences in other contextual factors
• Comparing highly diverse cases allows researchers to eliminate variables that differ across contexts as potential explanations for the shared outcome
• Any similarities found between the different cases are unlikely to be spurious and can be considered as meaningful explanatory factors
• The approach is well-suited for exploratory research aimed at generating hypotheses about causal relationships

Theoretical foundations of MDSD

• Emerged as a research design within the field of comparative politics in the mid-20th century
• Developed as a way to conduct systematic comparisons across countries and identify key variables associated with political outcomes
• Builds on the comparative method's emphasis on using differences and similarities between cases to test hypotheses and develop theories

Comparative politics origins

• Arose in response to the challenges of comparing political systems and outcomes across diverse national contexts
• Reflected a growing interest in developing rigorous methods for cross-national comparisons and theory-building in political science
• Drew on earlier works in comparative politics that used controlled comparisons to identify key explanatory variables (Tocqueville's Democracy in America, Mill's Method of Difference)

Logic of eliminating irrelevant variables

• By comparing cases that are as different as possible, MDSD seeks to eliminate variables that are not consistently associated with the outcome of interest
• Differences between cases can be treated as "controlled for" or held constant, allowing researchers to focus on the factors that remain similar across contexts
• This approach helps to identify the necessary conditions for a particular outcome and rule out variables that may be sufficient but not necessary

MDSD vs most similar systems design

• Both MDSD and MSSD are research designs used in comparative politics to identify key explanatory variables through systematic case comparisons
• The two approaches differ in their case selection strategy and the types of variables they seek to control for or eliminate

Similarities between MDSD and MSSD

• Both designs involve comparing cases that share a similar outcome or dependent variable of interest
• Aim to identify key explanatory factors by analyzing similarities and differences across cases
• Require careful case selection and attention to the comparability of data across contexts
• Can be used for hypothesis-generating or hypothesis-testing purposes depending on the research goals

Key differences in approach

• MSSD selects cases that are as similar as possible in terms of potential explanatory variables, while MDSD selects cases that are as different as possible
• MSSD seeks to control for contextual factors by holding them constant across cases, while MDSD seeks to eliminate irrelevant variables by focusing on factors that remain constant despite contextual differences
• MSSD is better suited for identifying sufficient conditions for an outcome, while MDSD is better suited for identifying necessary conditions
• MSSD may be more appropriate when there are many potential explanatory variables, while MDSD may be more appropriate when there are fewer key variables of interest

Strengths of most different systems design

• Allows researchers to identify key explanatory variables that are robust across diverse contexts
• Helps to eliminate irrelevant or spurious factors by focusing on similarities between highly different cases
• Can generate new hypotheses and theoretical insights by revealing unexpected commonalities between diverse cases

Isolating key explanatory variables

• By comparing cases that differ on many potential explanatory factors, MDSD helps to isolate the variables that are consistently associated with the outcome of interest
• Eliminates variables that differ across cases as potential explanations, allowing researchers to focus on the factors that remain constant
• Can identify necessary conditions for a particular outcome, even if those conditions are not sufficient to produce the outcome in all cases

Applicability across diverse contexts

• MDSD is well-suited for research that seeks to identify explanatory factors that are valid across a wide range of contexts
• Can help to develop theories and hypotheses that are applicable beyond the specific cases studied
• Allows researchers to test the generalizability of findings and identify scope conditions for particular explanations
• Particularly useful for comparative research that aims to explain outcomes across different regions, cultures, or political systems

Limitations of most different systems design

• Can be challenging to find cases that are truly different across all potential explanatory variables
• May overlook important contextual factors or interactions between variables that are not captured by the research design
• Relies heavily on the comparability and quality of data across diverse contexts, which can be difficult to ensure

Difficulty finding truly different systems

• In practice, it may be hard to identify cases that differ on all relevant variables while still sharing a similar outcome
• Cases that appear different on the surface may share underlying similarities that are not immediately apparent
• Researchers must be careful not to oversimplify or exaggerate differences between cases in order to fit the MDSD framework
• May require extensive background research and case knowledge to ensure that selected cases are appropriate for the research question

Potential for omitted variable bias

• By focusing on similarities between different cases, MDSD may overlook important variables that are not captured in the research design
• Contextual factors or interactions between variables may be difficult to identify or control for, leading to omitted variable bias
• Researchers must be cautious about drawing causal inferences based on MDSD findings, as unobserved factors may still be influencing the outcome of interest
• Combining MDSD with other research methods (process tracing, within-case analysis) can help to mitigate the risk of omitted variable bias

Implementing a most different systems design

• Involves several key steps, including selecting appropriate cases, identifying key variables of interest, and collecting comparable data across contexts
• Requires careful attention to case selection criteria and the operationalization of variables to ensure the validity of comparisons
• May involve challenges related to data availability, language barriers, and cultural differences across cases

Selecting appropriate cases

• Cases should be selected based on their differences on potential explanatory variables and their similarity on the outcome variable of interest
• Requires a clear definition of the outcome variable and a thorough understanding of the relevant explanatory factors
• May involve purposive sampling techniques (diverse case selection, extreme case selection) to identify cases that fit the MDSD criteria
• Should consider the practical feasibility of collecting data and making comparisons across the selected cases

Identifying key variables of interest

• Involves specifying the potential explanatory variables that will be examined in the study
• May draw on existing theories or literature to identify variables of interest, or may involve exploratory analysis to generate new hypotheses
• Requires clear operationalization of variables and attention to measurement validity across contexts
• Should consider the level of analysis (individual, group, country) and the time period of interest for each variable

Challenges in data collection

• Collecting comparable data across diverse contexts can be difficult due to differences in data availability, quality, and measurement
• May require working with multiple languages or cultural contexts, which can introduce translation or interpretation challenges
• Researchers may need to rely on a variety of data sources (surveys, archives, interviews) to gather information on key variables
• Should consider issues of measurement equivalence and the potential for bias or error in cross-cultural data collection
• Collaborating with local researchers or institutions can help to navigate data collection challenges and ensure the validity of comparisons

Analyzing results from MDSD studies

• Involves comparing cases systematically to identify patterns of similarity and difference on key variables
• Requires attention to the quality and comparability of data across cases, as well as the potential for alternative explanations or confounding factors
• May involve both within-case and cross-case analysis techniques to explore causal mechanisms and test hypotheses

Comparing cases to identify key factors

• Involves examining the values of key variables across cases to identify patterns of similarity and difference
• May use tabular or graphical displays to visualize comparisons and highlight key findings
• Requires attention to the level of measurement for each variable and the appropriate techniques for comparing values across cases
• Should consider the potential for measurement error or bias in the data and how this may affect comparisons

Drawing valid causal inferences

• Involves assessing the strength and consistency of associations between key variables and the outcome of interest
• Requires attention to the potential for spurious relationships or omitted variable bias in the analysis
• May involve testing alternative explanations or conducting sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of findings
• Should consider the limitations of MDSD for drawing causal inferences and the need for complementary research methods to strengthen conclusions

Considering alternative explanations

• Involves examining the potential for other factors or mechanisms to explain the observed patterns in the data
• May require conducting additional within-case analysis or process tracing to explore alternative explanations
• Should consider the potential for interaction effects or contextual factors that may modify the relationship between key variables and the outcome of interest
• May involve comparing findings to existing theories or literature to assess the plausibility of alternative explanations
• Requires transparency in reporting the limitations of the analysis and the potential for alternative interpretations of the data

Applications of most different systems design

• MDSD has been widely used in comparative politics research to study a range of political phenomena across different contexts
• Has been applied to topics such as democratization, social movements, economic development, and conflict resolution
• Can be used in conjunction with other research methods to strengthen causal inferences and explore mechanisms

Examples from comparative politics literature

• Przeworksi and Limongi's (1997) study of the relationship between economic development and democracy across a diverse set of countries
• Skocpol's (1979) comparison of social revolutions in France, Russia, and China to identify key structural factors associated with revolutionary outcomes
• Lijphart's (1971) analysis of consociational democracy in European countries with deep cultural and linguistic divides
• Putnam's (1993) study of the role of social capital in shaping institutional performance across different regions of Italy

Use in other social science disciplines

• MDSD has been adapted and applied in other fields such as sociology, economics, and public health to study a range of social phenomena
• Examples include:
  • Ragin's (1987) use of qualitative comparative analysis to study the conditions associated with labor mobilization across different countries
  • Ebbinghaus and Visser's (1999) comparison of trade union decline across Western European nations with diverse institutional and economic contexts
  • Lieberman's (2009) study of the politics of AIDS policy in Brazil and South Africa, highlighting the role of institutional and cultural factors in shaping responses to the epidemic
• Demonstrates the flexibility and adaptability of MDSD as a research design for exploring complex social and political phenomena across different contexts

Advancements and future directions for MDSD

• Methodological innovations and refinements have expanded the possibilities for MDSD research in recent years
• New opportunities for MDSD research have emerged with the growth of cross-national datasets and advances in data collection and analysis techniques
• Future directions for MDSD research may involve greater integration with other research methods and the development of new tools for case selection and comparison

Methodological innovations and refinements

• Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) has emerged as a powerful tool for conducting MDSD research, allowing for more nuanced comparisons of cases based on their degree of membership in different sets
• Advances in multi-level modeling and hierarchical analysis have enabled researchers to examine the interplay between individual-level and contextual factors in shaping outcomes across different systems
• Developments in case selection techniques, such as diverse case selection and typological theory, have provided new tools for identifying and comparing cases that fit the MDSD criteria
• Innovations in data visualization and graphical displays have enhanced the ability of researchers to communicate and interpret findings from MDSD studies

Opportunities for further research

• The growing availability of cross-national data on a wide range of social and political indicators has expanded the possibilities for MDSD research across different contexts and time periods
• Advances in natural language processing and machine learning techniques have opened up new opportunities for analyzing text-based data sources (news media, social media, government documents) across different languages and contexts
• The increasing importance of transnational and global phenomena (climate change, migration, terrorism) has created new opportunities for MDSD research that examines the interplay between local and global factors in shaping outcomes
• The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for comparative research on public health policies and outcomes across different political and social contexts, creating new opportunities for MDSD studies in this area
• Collaborations between researchers from different disciplines and regions can help to strengthen the validity and generalizability of MDSD findings and identify new avenues for research and theory-building.