Süreç Takibi Yöntemi: Nedensellik, Zamansallık, Kuram Geliştirme ve Kuram Testi

Mehtap Söyler

doi:10.36484/liberal.871546

TR EN

Süreç Takibi Yöntemi: Nedensellik, Zamansallık, Kuram Geliştirme ve Kuram Testi

Öz

Tek veya az sayıda vakada, vaka-içi analizle nedensel ve zamansal çıkarım yapmak için uygulanan süreç takibi, nitel araştırmanın temel analitik araçlarındandır. Bu
makale, küme kuramına dayalı bir yöntem olarak süreç takibini, çıkarımsal faydalarını, kuram geliştirmek ve nedensel mekanizmaları ortaya çıkararak kuram test
etmek için nasıl kullanıldığını inceler. Süreç takibinin işlevlerine nicel ve nitel kültürün nedensellik anlayışındaki farklar aracılığıyla açıklık getirir. Makale, bu yöntemin
‘nedenlerin çoğulluğu’ sorununa yaklaşımda sunduğu avantajları, karşılaştırmalı siyaset literatüründen örneklerle açıklayarak özgün katkı sunar. Süreç takibi yönteminde
Bayesci mantıkla kuram testi tekniklerini Türkiye’nin Irak Savaşı’na katılma kararsızlığı, Soğuk Savaş’ın sona ermesi ve Sovyet ‘yeni düşüncesi’, Türkiye’de yerel seçimler ve kent politikaları üzerine vaka analizlerinden hipotez testleriyle; süreç takibiyle kuram geliştirme stratejilerini, Balkanlar’da Türk azınlığın anayasal kabulü, Doğu Asya’da kalkınmacı devletler, Orta Amerika’da liberalizmin mirasları olan siyasi rejimler üzerine vaka analizi örnekleriyle uygulamalı olarak gösterir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

süreç takibi , vaka-içi analiz , kuram geliştirme , kuram testi , Nedensel Mekanizma , Bayesci Mantık

Process Tracing Method: Causality, Temporality, Theory Generation, and Theory Testing

Abstract

Process tracing is an essential analytical tool for causal and temporal inference in qualitative research. This article examines process tracing as a set theoretic method
for within-case analysis, its inferential advantages and application for theory generation, identification of causal mechanisms, and theory testing. It explains the functions of process-tracing by referring to the qualitative and quantitative methodology distinction. It also elucidates the advantages of this method in approaching the issue of ‘plurality of causes’ by examples from the comparative politics literature, and demonstrates the process-tracing techniques application based on Bayesian logic for theory testing with case studies on Turkey’s indecision to participate in the Iraq War, the end of Cold War and Soviet ‘new thinking’, and local elections and urban politics in Turkey. It illustrates theory development strategies with case studies on the recognition of Turkish minorities in Balkans, the developmental states in East Asia, and the legacies of liberalism in Central America.

Keywords

causal inference , process tracing , temporality , within-case analysis , theory generation

References

Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., ve Robinson, J. A. (2019). Democracy Does Cause Growth Suresh Naidu Pascual Restrepo. Journal of political Economy, 127(1), 47–100.
Aktürk, Ş. (2019). Temporal Horizons in the Study of Turkish Politics: Prevalence of Non-Causal Description and seemingly “Global Warming” Type of Causality. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, 8(2), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.472127
Aktürk, Ş., ve Lika, I. (2020). The puzzle of Turkish minority representation, nationhood cleavage, and politics of recognition in Bulgaria, Greece, and North Macedonia. Mediterranean Politics, 00(00), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2020.1750269
Andrew Bennett, ve Jeffrey T. Checkel (Ed.). (2015). Process Tracing. Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool (First). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bennett, A. (2016). Do New Accounts of Causal Mechanisms Offer Practical Advice for Process Tracing? Qualitative ve Multi-Method Research, Fall/Sprin, 34–39.
Bennett, A., ve Elman, C. (2006). Qualitative Research: Recent Developments in Case Study Methods. Annual Review of Political Science, 9(1), 455–476.
Berry, M. E. (2018). War, Women, and Power: From Violence to Mobilization in Rwanda and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boix, C., ve Stokes, S. C. (2003). Endogenous democratization. World Politics, 55(4), 517–549.
Bozçağa, T., ve Holland, A. C. (2018). Enforcement Process Tracing: Forbearance and Dilution in Urban Colombia and Turkey. Studies in Comparative International Development, 53(3), 300–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-018-9274-1
Brady, H. E. (2008). Causation and Explanation in Social Science. Içinde J. M. Box-Steffensmeier, H. E. Brady, ve D. Collier (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology (ss. 217–270). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286546.003.0010

Braumoeller, B. F. (2003). Causal Complexity and the Study of Politics. Political Analysis, 11(03), 209–233.
Braumoeller, B. F. (2004). Hypothesis testing and multiplicative interaction terms. International Organization, 58, 807–20.
Burkhart, R. E., ve Lewis-Beck, M. S. (1994). Comparative Democracy: The Economic Development Thesis. American Political Science Review, 88(4), 903–910. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082715
Cansun, Ş., ve Arık, E. (2019). Türkiye Adresli Siyaset Bilimi Yayınlarının Bibliyometrik Analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 47(3), 853–874.
Capoccia, G., ve Ziblatt, D. (2010). The historical turn in democratization studies: A new research agenda for Europe and beyond. Comparative Political Studies (C. 43).
Clarke, K. (2018). When do the dispossessed protest? Informal leadership and mobilization in Syrian refugee camps. Perspectives on Politics, 16(3), 617–633. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592718001020
Collier, D. (2011). Understanding process tracing. Political Science and Politics, 44(4), 823–830. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096511001429
Collier, D., Brady, H. E., ve Seawright, J. (2010). Sources of Leverage in Causal Inference: Toward an Alternative View of Methodology. Içinde Henry E. Brady ve D. Collier (Ed.), Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards (ss. 161–200). Lanham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Plymouth, UK: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Doner, R. F., Ritchie, B. K., ve Slater, D. (2005). Systemic vulnerability and the origins of developmental states: Northeast and Southeast Asia in comparative perspective. International Organization, 59(2), 327–361.
Doyle, A. C. (2012). The Complete Sherlock Holmes. New York: Doubleday.
Elman, C. (2013). Duck-Rabbits in Social Analysis: A Tale of Two Cultures. Comparative Political Studies, 46(2), 266–277.
English, R. (2007). Perestroika without politics: How realism misunderstands the Cold War’s end. Içinde G. Goertz ve J. S. Levy (Ed.), Explaining war and peace: Case studies and necessary condition counterfactuals (ss. 237–260). London and New York: Routledge.
George, A. L. (1979). Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison. Içinde P. G. Lauren (Ed.), Diplomacy: New Approaches in History, Theory and Policy (ss. 43–68). New York: The Free Press.
George, A. L., ve Bennett, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Gerring, J. (2004). What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? The American Political Science Review, 98(2), 341–354.
Goertz, G. (2006). Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Goertz, G., ve Mahoney, J. (2012). A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Hall, P. A. (2003). Aligning ontology and methodology in comparative research. Içinde J. Mahoney ve D. Rueschemeyer (Ed.), Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (ss. 373–404). Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, P. A. (2008). Systematic Process Analysis: What it is and how to use it. European Political Science, 7(3), 304–17.
Hume, D. (1748). Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding. New York: Dover Publications.
İşeri, E., ve Esentürk, N. (2016). Türkiye’de Uluslararası İlişkiler Çalışmaları: Merkez-Çevre Yaklaşımı. Elektronik Mesleki Gelişim ve Araştırma Dergisi, 6(2), 17–33.
King, G., Keohane, R. O., ve Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy : Economic Development and Political Legitimacy Author ( s ): Seymour Martin Lipset Source : The American Political Science Review , Vol . 53 , No . 1 ( Mar ., 1959 ), pp . 69-105 Published by : American Political Scien. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69–105.
Mahoney, J. (2001). The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America. Latin American Politics and Society (C. 45). Baltimore. MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mahoney, J. (2012). The Logic of Process Tracing Tests in the Social Sciences. Sociological Methods and Research, 41(4), 570–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124112437709
Mahoney, J. (2015). Process Tracing and Historical Explanation. Security Studies, 24(2), 200–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2015.1036610
Mahoney, J. (2016). Mechanisms, Bayesianism, and process tracing. New Political Economy, 21(5), 493–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2016.1201803
Mahoney, J., ve Falleti, T. G. (2015). The comparative sequential method. Içinde J. Mahoney ve K. Thelen (Ed.), Advances in Comparative Historical Analysis (ss. 211–239). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mahoney, J., ve Vanderpoel, R. S. (2015). Set Diagrams and Qualitative Research. Comparative Political Studies, 48(1), 65–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414013519410
Mainwaring, S., ve Pérez-Liñán. (2013). Democracies and Dictatorships in Latin America: Emergence, Survival, and Fall. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mello, P. A. (2014). Democratic Participation in Armed Conflict. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mill, J. S. (1843). A System of Logic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Mumford, S., ve Anjum, R. L. (2013). Causation: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Munck, G. L., ve Snyder, R. (2007). Debating the direction of comparative politics: An analysis of leading journals. Comparative Political Studies, 40(1), 5–31.
Pierson, P. (2011). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Popper, K. (1969). Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Przeworski, A., Alvarez, M., Cheibub, J. A., ve Limongi, F. (2000). Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Material Wellbeing in the World (1950-1990). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ragin, C. C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: The University of California Press.
Ragin, C. C. (1992). Introduction: Cases of “What is a case?” (ss. 1–18). Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, J. A. (2006). Economic development and democracy. Annual Review of Political Science, 9(1966), 503–527. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.092704.171256
Rueschemeyer, D., Stephens, J. D., ve Stephens, E. H. (1992). Capitalist Development and Democracy. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
Sartori, G. (1970). Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics. American Political Science Review, 64(04), 1033–1053.
Sekhon, J. S. (2010). The Neyman-Rubin-Holland Model of Causal Inference and Estimation via Matching Methods. Içinde J.M. Box-Steffensmeier, H. E. Brady, ve D. Collier (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology (ss. 271–299). Oxford University Press.
Somer, M. (2014). Theory-consuming or Theory-producing?: Studying Turkey as a Theory-developing Critical Case. Turkish Studies, 15(4), 571–588.
Söyler, M. (2020a). Kavram ve Kuram Analizi Yöntemi: Sartori Geleneği. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 66(17), 93–115.
Söyler, M. (2020b). Nitel ve Nicel Yöntem Farkına Çoğulcu Yaklaşım: KKV-Sonrası Dönemde Nitel Yöntem ve Kazanımları. Amme Idaresi Dergisi, 53(2), 99–127.
Taydaş, Z., ve Özdamar, Ö. (2013). A Divided Government, an Ideological Parliament, and an Insecure Leader: Turkey’s Indecision about Joining the Iraq War. Social Science Quarterly, 94(1), 217–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2012.00871.x
Trampusch, C., ve Palier, B. (2016). Between X and Y: how process tracing contributes to opening the black box of causality. New Political Economy, 21(5), 437–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2015.1134465
Van Evera, S. (1997). Guide to methods for students of political science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Waldner, D. (2015). What Makes Process Tracing Good? Causal Mechanisms, Causal Inference, and the Completeness Standard in Comparative Politics. Içinde A. Bennett ve J. T. Checkel (Ed.), Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool (ss. 126–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Political Science

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Mehtap Söyler ^*
0000-0003-0243-3240
Türkiye

Publication Date

March 25, 2021

Submission Date

February 1, 2021

Acceptance Date

March 15, 2021

Published in Issue

Year 2021 Volume: 26 Number: 101

DOI

https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.871546

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA99ZY87BF

APA

Söyler, M. (2021). Süreç Takibi Yöntemi: Nedensellik, Zamansallık, Kuram Geliştirme ve Kuram Testi. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 26(101), 67-94. https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.871546