Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fuzzy Set or Fuzzy Logic? Comparing the Value of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) Versus Regression Analysis for the Study of Women's Legislative Representation

  • Research
  • Published:
European Political Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article I compare the results of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) applied to a medium-sized data set on women's legislative representation in Asian and Latin American countries to those of regression analysis based on the same data set. I find that both methods are suboptimal. Explaining the outcome of high women's representation, fsQCA suggests complex configurations of conditions with low empirical coverage and high sensitivity to coding. While, not without shortcomings, OLS regression analysis performs somewhat better than fsQCA. On the one hand, this method identifies two statistically significant and substantively relevant variables (i.e. quota rules and communist regimes), which strongly increase the percentage of women deputies. On the other hand, the model's interpretation is not completely clear cut, as scholars may disagree over the relevance of the one marginally statistically and substantively significant variable, the longevity of democracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Quantitative research is premised on the assumption that explanatory factors have independent impacts on outcomes, while qualitative research is case-oriented and interested in the causal mechanisms that lead to an outcome (George and Bennett, 2005).

  2. For example, researchers could create three categories in determining a country's regime type. They could code a democracy 1, a hybrid regime .5 and a non-democracy 0.

  3. Krook's (2010b) operationalisation yields four combinations of conditions that lead to high representation: (1) quotas, women's low status in society, low levels of development and post-conflict situations; (2) quotas, women's high status in society, high levels of development and post-conflict situations; (3) non-PR electoral systems, women's high status in society, high levels of development and post-conflict situations and (4) non-PR electoral systems, quotas, women's low status in society, high levels of development and non-post-conflict situations. In contrast, my operationalisation only triggers two configurations: (1) quotas, high women's status in society, high levels of development and post-conflict situations and (2) PR electoral systems, quotas, high women's status in society, high levels of development and post-conflict situations.

  4. The 30 per cent threshold is based on a qualitative anchor. The cut-off point of approximate one-third women in parliament is frequently perceived as the critical mass enabling women to exert meaningful influence on politics (Krook, 2009).

  5. The cross-over point of 20 per cent women's representation is chosen because it approximates the global mean women's representation rate, which stands at slightly above 19 per cent.

  6. The consistency score measures the degree to which any configuration of independent variables is consistent with the outcome. The coverage rate measures the percentage of the data that is covered by the solution (Ragin, 2008).

  7. The configurations of explanatory variables I obtained from these models were both as complex as those I obtained from the combined data set and not robust to minor alterations in the calibrations of the relevant variables. In addition, the combinations of factors that characterise the outcome, high female representation, were also characterised by low solution coverage.

  8. In a separate model (not reported), I also tested for a possible interaction between the electoral system type and quotas. However, I find that the interactive term is neither statistically significant nor substantively relevant.

  9. Because its communist/socialist credentials are not entirely clear, I run a separate regression analysis excluding Venezuela from the subset of countries coded communist. This change increases the magnitude of the coefficient ‘communist countries’ by an additional two percentage points. The impact of all other indicators remains unchanged.

  10. For example, it is unclear as to whether 25, 30 or 33 per cent is a sufficiently high enough benchmark for high women's representation in parliament.

  11. An additional weakness of QCA is that, similar to omitted variable bias in regression analysis, it is impossible to be certain that all conditions in the QCA analysis have been included. This implies that there always can be other combinations of factors that lead to the same outcome (see Seawright, 2005).

References

  • Bauer, G. (2008) ‘Electoral gender quotas for parliament in East and Southern Africa’, International Feminist Journal of Politics 10 (3): 347–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, J.M. and Folger, R.G. (1998) ‘When it is acceptable to accept a null-hypothesis: no way, Jose?’ Organizational Research Methods 1 (3): 334–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronqvist, L. (2005) ‘Introduction to multi-value qualitative comparative analysis (MVQCA)’, COMPASSS didactics paper No. 2005/4.

  • Dahlerup, D. (ed.) (2006) Women, Quotas, and Politics, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duverger, M. (1955) The Political Role of Women, Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franceschet, S. (2005) Women and Politics in Chile, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedom House. (2008) ‘Freedom in the world: subcategory and aggregate scores’, available at: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=276, accessed 1 December 2009.

  • George, A.L. and Bennett, A. (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in Social Sciences, Boston: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J. and Kuehner, S. (2010) ‘Beyond the dependent variable problem: the methodological challenges of capturing productive and protective dimensions of social policy’, Social Policy and Society 9 (2): 167–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M.M. (2009) ‘Armed conflict, international linkages, and women's parliamentary representation in developing nations’, Social Problems 56 (1): 174–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M.M. and Paxton, P. (2008) ‘Continuous change, episodes, and critical periods: a framework for understanding women's political representation over time’, Politics & Gender 4 (2): 233–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. and Norris, P. (2003) Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU). (2008) ‘Women in national parliaments’, available at: http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm, accessed 21 December 2008.

  • Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU). (2011) ‘Women's suffrage’, available at: http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/suffrage.htm, accessed 23 September 2011.

  • International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA). (2008) ‘Electoral system design’, available at: http://www.idea.int/esd, accessed 10 November 2008.

  • Kenworthy, L. and Malami, M. (1999) ‘Gender inequality in political representation: a worldwide comparative analysis’, Social Forces 78 (2): 235–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krook, M.L. (2009) Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krook, M.L. (2010a) ‘Why are fewer women than men elected? Gender and the dynamics of candidate selection’, Political Studies Review 8 (2): 155–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krook, M.L. (2010b) ‘Women's representation in parliament: a qualitative comparative analysis’, Political Studies 58 (5): 886–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberson, S. (2004) ‘Comments on the use and utility of QCA’, Qualitative Methods 2 (2): 13–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovenduski, J. and Norris, P. (eds.) (1993) Gender and Party Politics, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luciak, I.A. (2005) ‘Implementing gender equality provisions: lessons from the Central American Peace Accords’, Critical Half: Bi-Annual of Women for Women International 3 (1): 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matland, R.E. (1998) ‘Women's representation in national legislatures: developed and developing countries’, Legislative Studies Quarterly 23 (1): 107–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser, R.C. (2001) ‘The effects of electoral systems on women's representation in post-communist states’, Electoral Studies 20 (3): 353–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, P. (2006) ‘The impact of electoral reform on women's representation’, Acta Politica 41 (2): 197–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascall, G. and Lewis, J. (2004) ‘Emerging gender regimes and wider policies for gender equality in a wider Europe’, Journal of Social Policy 33 (3): 373–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paxton, P., Hughes, M. and Green, J. (2006) ‘The International Women's Movement and women's political representation, 1893–2003’, American Sociological Review 71 (6): 898–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paxton, P., Hughes, M. and Painter II, M. (2010) ‘Growth in women’s political representation: a longitudinal exploration of democracy, electoral system and gender quotas’, European Journal of Political Research 49 (1): 25–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quota Project (Global Database of Quotas for Women). (2010), available at: http://www.quotaproject.org/uid/search.cfm#, accessed 10 August 2010.

  • Ragin, C.C. (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C.C. (2000) Fuzzy-Set Social Science, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C.C. (2006) User's Guide to Fuzzy-Set/Qualitative Comparative Analysis 2.0, Tucson, AZ: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C.C. (2008) ‘Calibration Versus Measurement’, in D. Collier, H. Brady and J. Box-Steffensmeier (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C.C. (2009) ‘Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using Fuzzy Sets (fsQCA)’, in B. Rihoux and C. Ragin (eds.) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C.C., Drass, K.A. and Davey, S. (2006) Fuzzy-Set/Qualitative Comparative Analysis 2.0, Tucson, AZ: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, A., Reilly, B. and Ellis, A. (2005) Electoral System Design: The New International IDEA Handbook, Stockholm: International IDEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rihoux, B. (2003) ‘Bridging the gap between the qualitative and quantitative worlds? A retrospective and prospective view on qualitative comparative analysis’, Field Methods 15 (4): 351–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, A. (1998) ‘What is democratic consolidation?’ Journal of Democracy 9 (2): 91–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, C.Q. (2009) The Consolidation of Democracy: Comparing Europe and Latin America, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, C.Q. and Wagemann, C. (2007) Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy Set: Ein Lehrbuch fuer Anwender and jene die es werden wollen, Opladen: Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, C.Q. and Wagemann, C. (2010) ‘Qualitative comparative analysis and fuzzy sets: the agenda of a research approach and a data analysis technique’, Comparative Sociology 9 (3): 376–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwindt-Bayer, L. (2010) Political Power and Women's Representation in Latin America, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schwindt-Bayer, L.A. and Mishler, W. (2005) ‘An integrated model of women's representation’, The Journal of Politics 67 (2): 407–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seawright, J. (2005) ‘Qualitative comparative analysis vis-à-vis regression’, Comparative International Development 40 (1): 3–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockemer, D. (2007) ‘Why are there differences in the representation of women in the 27 countries of the European Union’, Perspectives on European Politics and Society 8 (4): 476–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockemer, D. (2009) ‘Women's parliamentary representation: are women more highly represented in (consolidated) democracies than in non-democracies?’ Contemporary Politics 15 (4): 429–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockemer, D. (2011) ‘Women's parliamentary representation in Africa: the impact of democracy and corruption on the number of female deputies in national parliaments’, Political Studies 59 (3): 693–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tripp, A.M. and Kang, A. (2008) ‘The global impact of quotas: on the fast track to increased female legislative representation’, Comparative Political Studies 41 (3): 338–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2006) ‘Education index’, available at: http://hdr.undp.org, accessed 23 December 2009.

  • Vis, B. (2009) ‘Governments and unpopular social policy reform: biting the bullet or steering clear?’ European Journal of Political Research 48 (1): 31–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viterna, J., Fallon, K.M. and Beckfield, J. (2008) ‘How development matters: a research note on the relationship between development, democracy, and women's political representation’, International Journal of Comparative Sociology 49 (6): 455–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wängnerud, L. (2009) ‘Women in parliaments: descriptive and substantive representation’, Annual Review of Political Science 12: 51–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, M.Y. (2004) ‘Explaining women's legislative representation in sub-Saharan Africa’, Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (3): 447–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Daniel Stockemer

Authors
  1. Daniel Stockemer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Appendices

APPENDIX A

THE ORIGINAL DATA SET

In the table below the variables are in the following order: women's representation, education index, years democracy, the female activity rate in per cent, electoral system type, communist country, quotas, number of years women have had the right to vote.

illustration

figure b

APPENDIX B

THE FULL fsQCA OUTPUT

Algorithm: Quine-McCluskey

 True: 1

— COMPLEX SOLUTION —

frequency cut-off: 1.000000

consistency cut-off: 0.854701

illustration

figure a

solution coverage: 0.231264

solution consistency: 0.954459

For the fsQCA analysis I use the following abbreviations:

edu=eduation

dem=consolidation/longevity of democracy

eco=female economic activity rate

pr=parliamentary representation

q=quota provisions

com=communist regime type

ws=women's suffrage

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stockemer, D. Fuzzy Set or Fuzzy Logic? Comparing the Value of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) Versus Regression Analysis for the Study of Women's Legislative Representation. Eur Polit Sci 12, 86–101 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2012.25

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2012.25

Keywords

Search

Navigation