QCA as competing or complementary method? A qualitative comparative analysis approach to protest event data

Abstract

Studies of state repression of protest have focused on theories of threat and weakness, in which states repress movements that threaten state authority or elite interest or movements that lack organizational or political strength. Empirical studies have most often used regression analysis of protest-event datasets. This paper proposes qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) as an alternative approach to protest-event data that retains more qualitative complexity and captures the conjunctural and heterogeneous nature of causation during events. The paper applies both methods to protest data from the United States (1963–1973). While both methods provide strong evidence for the threat and weakness hypotheses, QCA more effectively illustrates how combinations of threat and weakness factors increase the risk of repression. The paper argues that QCA is a viable alternative approach to event data, but it should also be seen as a valuable complementary method that can improve regression-based approaches.

Keywords:

• qualitative comparative analysis
• state repression
• protest events
• social movements
• protest policing

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Davenport et al. (2011) argue African American protesters should be conceptualized as a ‘threat’ variable, based on perceptions of authorities (p. 154). However, I treat it as a ‘weakness’ variable in order to maintain the distinction between protest behavior and status-related factors, as has been done in previous studies (Ayoub, 2010; Earl et al., 2003).

2. Example: Religious fundamentalists are a subset of political conservatives, but religious fundamentalism is one of multiple paths to political conservativism (Ragin, 2000, pp. 10–11).

3. Example: An advanced degree is necessary for a professional position, but not all people with advanced degrees have professional positions (Ragin, 2000, pp. 10–11).

4. Franzosi (2010) applies QCA to data on fascist violence (p. 130) as an illustrative example of possible uses of QCA, but it is not central to his analysis.

5. For further details on the data collection and coding, see the DCA website: http://web.stanford.edu/group/collectiveaction/cgi-bin/drupal/.

6. Where number of protesters was not reported, the median of estimated size of protest based on verbal cues was imputed. The log of protest size is taken to correct for heteroskedasticity and because it is expected that larger protests create more opportunities for arrest and repression.

7. Confrontational tactics: protests in form of civil disobedience, attacks, strikes, riots, or conflicts, or if they included activities such as blockades, building takeovers, looting, damaged property, meeting disruptions, or kidnappings.

8. Radical claims: support for Equal Rights Amendment, welfare, black power, black pride, black separatism, gay and lesbian rights, or opposition to the Vietnam War, military recruitment, police harassment, or government surveillance. Also coded as radical if names of organizations or brief qualitative descriptions of events included support for communism, socialism, anarchism, or fascism.

9. Subordinate groups included racial and ethnic minorities, gays and lesbians, poor people, and the homeless.