References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 October 2019
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Art and Craft of Comparison , pp. 153 - 163Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Abbott, A. (2004) Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social Sciences. New York: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Abu-Lughod, L. (2006) [1991] ‘Writing against culture’, in Moore, H. L. and Sanders, T. (eds.) Anthropology in Theory: Issues in Epistemology. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 466–479.Google Scholar
Adcock, R. (2006) ‘Generalization in comparative and historical social science: the difference that interpretivism makes’, in Yanow, D. and Schwartz-Shea, P. (eds.) Interpretation and Method. New York: Routledge, pp. 50–66.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, rev. ed. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Bailey, F. G. (2001) [1969] Stratagems and Spoils: A Social Anthropology of Politics, new ed. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. (1970) ‘The discourse of history’, in Lane, M. (ed.) Structuralism: A Reader. London: Jonathan Cape, pp. 145–155.Google Scholar
Bates, R. H. (1997) ‘Area studies and the discipline: a useful controversy?’, Political Science and Politics 30 (2): 166–169.Google Scholar
Bayard de Volo, L. (2015) ‘Comparative politics’, in Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Interpretive Political Science. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 241–255.Google Scholar
Bennett, A. and Checkel, J. T. (eds.) (2015) Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. (1999) The Logic of the History of Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. and Blakely, J. (2018) Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevir, M. and Kedar, A. (2008) ‘Concept formation in political science: an anti-naturalist critique of qualitative methodology’, Perspectives on Politics 6: 503–517.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2003) Interpreting British Governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2010) The State as Cultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (eds.) (2015) The Routledge Handbook of Interpretive Political Science. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blatter, J. and Haverland, M. (2012) Designing Case Studies: Explanatory Approaches in Mall-N Research. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Boin, A., ‘t Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. (2005) The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership under Pressure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. (2014) ‘“Hoisted with our own petard”: evidence and democratic deliberation on obesity’, Policy Sciences 47 (4): 345–365.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. (2015) ‘Toxic narratives in the deliberative system: how the ghost of Nanny stalks the obesity debate’, Policy Studies 36 (3): 314–328.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. (2016a) The Real War on Obesity: Contesting Knowledge and Meaning in a Public Health Crisis. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswell, J. (2016b) ‘Deliberating downstream: countering democratic distortions in the policy process’, Perspectives on Politics 14 (3): 724–737.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. (2018) ‘What makes evidence‐based policy making such a useful myth? The case of NICE guidance on bariatric surgery in the United Kingdom’, Governance 31 (2): 199–214.Google Scholar
Boswell, J., Cairney, P. and St Denny, E. (2019) ‘The politics of institutionalizing preventive health’, Social Science and Medicine 228: 202–210.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. and Corbett, J. (2015a) ‘Embracing impressionism: revealing the brush strokes of interpretive research’, Critical Policy Studies 9: 216–225.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. and Corbett, J. (2015b) ‘Who are we trying to impress? Reflections on navigating political science, ethnography and interpretation’, Journal of Organizational Ethnography 4 (2): 223–235.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. and Corbett, J. (2015c) ‘On making an impression: a response to our critics’, Critical Policy Studies 9 (3): 375–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswell, J and Corbett, J. (2015d) ‘Stoic Democrats? Anti-politics, elite cynicism and the policy process’, Journal of European Public Policy 22 (10): 1388–1405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswell, J. and Corbett, J. (2017) ‘Why and how to compare deliberative systems’, European Journal of Political Research 56 (4): 801–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswell, J., Hendriks, C. M. and Ercan, S. A. (2016) Message received? Examining transmission in deliberative systems. Critical Policy Studies 10 (3): 263–283.Google Scholar
Boswell, J., Ryan, M., Killick, A., et al. (2018) Making Ends Meet: Experiencing Deprivation on the South Coast of England. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Boudon, R. (1993) ‘Towards a synthetic theory of rationality’, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7: 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braa, J., Monteiro, E. and Sahay, S. (2004) ‘Networks of action: sustainable health information systems across developing countries’, MIS Quarterly 28 (3): 337–362.Google Scholar
Brady, H. E. and Collier, D. (eds.) (2010) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3: 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryman, A. (ed.) (2001) Ethnography. Volume 1: The Nature of Ethnography; Volume 2: Ethnographic Fieldwork Practice; Volume 3: Issues in Ethnography; Volume 4: Analysis and Writing in Ethnography. London: Sage Benchmarks in Social Research Methods.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, T. (1977) The BBC: Public Institution and Private World. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Clancy, J. I. (ed.) (2003) Impressionism: Historical Overview and Bibliography. New York: Nova Science.Google Scholar
Clifford, J. (1986) ‘Introduction: partial truths’, in Clifford, J. and Marcus, G. E. (eds.) Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifford, J. (1988) ‘On ethnographic authority’, in The Predicament of Culture. Twentieth Century Ethnography, Literature, and Art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 21–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifford, J. and Marcus, G. E. (eds.) (1986) Writing Culture. The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, D., Brady, H. E. and Seawright, J. (2010) ‘Critiques, responses and trade offs: drawing together the debate’, in Brady, H. E. and Collier, D. (eds.) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd rev. ed. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 195–227.Google Scholar
Coppedge, M. (2012) Democratization and Research Methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. (2012) ‘“Two worlds”? Interpreting political leadership narratives in the 20th-century Pacific’, The Journal of Pacific History 47: 69–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, J. (2013a) ‘Politicians and professionalization in the Pacific Islands: revisiting self‐regulation?’, Politics & Policy 41 (6): 852–876.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. (2013b) ‘“A calling from God”: politicians and religiosity in the Pacific Islands’, Global Change, Peace & Security 25 (3): 283–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, J. (2014) ‘Practising reflection: empathy, emotion and intuition in political life writing’, Life Writing 11: 349–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, J. (2015a) Being Political: Leadership and Democracy in the Pacific Islands. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. (2015b) ‘“Everybody knows everybody”: practising politics in the Pacific Islands’, Democratization 22 (1): 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, J. (2015c) ‘Small fish swimming in the shape of a shark: why politicians join political parties in the Pacific Islands’, Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 53 (2): 130–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, J. (2017) Australia’s Foreign Aid Dilemma: Humanitarian Aspirations Confront Democratic Legitimacy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. and Liki, A. (2015) ‘Intersecting identities, divergent views: interpreting the experiences of women politicians in the Pacific Islands’, Politics & Gender 11: 320–344.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. and Shiu, R. N. (2014) ‘Leadership succession and the high drama of political conduct: corruption stories from Samoa’, Pacific Affairs 87 (4): 743–763.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. and Veenendaal, W. (2016) ‘Westminster in small states: comparing the Caribbean and Pacific experience’, Contemporary Politics 22 (4): 432–449.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. and Veenendaal, W. (2018) Democracy in Small States: Why It Can Persist Against All Odds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Corbett, J., Veenendaal, W. and Ugyel, L. (2017) ‘Why monarchy persists in small states: the cases of Tonga, Bhutan and Liechtenstein’, Democratization 24 (4): 689–706.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. and Wood, T. (2013) ‘Profiling politicians in Solomon Islands: professionalisation of a political elite?’ Australian Journal of Political Science 48 (3): 320–334.Google Scholar
Coser, L. A. (1974) Greedy Institutions: Patterns of Undivided Commitment. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Cramer, K. J. (2012) ‘Putting inequality in its place: rural consciousness and the power of perspective’, American Political Science Review 106 (3): 517–532.Google Scholar
Cramer, K. J. (2016) The Politics of Resentment: Rural Consciousness in Wisconsin and the Rise of Scott Walker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crewe, E. (2005) Lords of Parliament: Manners, Rituals and Politics. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Dasandi, N. and Erez, L. (2017) ‘The donor’s dilemma: international aid and human rights violations’, British Journal of Political Science 1–22.Google Scholar
Delamont, S. (2007) ‘Ethnography and participant observation’, in Seale, C., Giampietri, G., Gubrium, J. F. and Silverman, D. S. (eds.) Qualitative Research Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 205–227.Google Scholar
Dexter, L. (2006) [1970] Elite and Specialized Interviewing. Colchester, Essex: European Consortium for Political Research.Google Scholar
Eckstein, H. (1975) ‘Case studies and theory in political science’, in Greenstein, F. and Polsby, N. (eds.) Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 7. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, pp. 94–137.Google Scholar
Ellis, C. (2004) The Ethnographic I: A Methodological Novel about Autoethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, C. and Bochner, A. P. (2000) ‘Autoethnography, personal narratives and reflexivity: researcher as subject’, in Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed. London: Sage, pp. 733–768.Google Scholar
Ellis, C. and Bochner, A. P. (2006) ‘Analyzing analytic autoethnography’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 35: 429–449.Google Scholar
Elman, C. and Kapiszewski, D. (2014) ‘Data access and research transparency in the qualitative tradition’, PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 43–47.Google Scholar
Elman, C., Kapiszewski, D. and Lupia, A. (2018) ‘Transparent social inquiry: implications for political science’, Annual Review of Political Science 21 (1): 29–47.Google Scholar
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I. and Shaw, L. L. (2011) [1995] Writing Ethnographic Field Notes, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ercan, S. A. (2015) ‘Creating and sustaining evidence for “failed multiculturalism”: the case of “honor killing” in Germany’, American Behavioral Scientist 59 (6): 658–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ercan, S. A., Hendriks, C. M. and Boswell, J. (2017) ‘Studying public deliberation after the systemic turn: the crucial role for interpretive research’, Policy and Politics 45 (2): 195–212.Google Scholar
Fenno, R. F. (1978) Home Style: House Members in their Districts. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Fenno, R. E. (1990) Watching Politicians: Essays on Participant Observation. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California.Google Scholar
Flinders, M. (2013) ‘The tyranny of relevance and the art of translation’, Political Studies Review 11: 149–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (1998) Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006) ‘Five misunderstandings about case studies’, Qualitative Inquiry 12: 219–245.Google Scholar
Fujii, L. A. (2013) ‘The puzzle of extra-lethal violence’, Perspectives on Politics 11: 410–426.Google Scholar
Fujii, L. A. (2017) Interviewing in Social Science Research: A Relational Approach. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fox, K. (2004) Watching the English. The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour. London: Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar
Furlong, P. and Marsh, D. (2002) ‘Skin not a sweater: ontology and epistemology in political science’, in Marsh, D. and Stoker, G.(eds.) Theory and Methods in Political Science. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 17–41.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H. (1960) Truth and Method. Translated by Weinscheimer, J. and Marshall, D. G. Reprinted 2004. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Geddes, M. (2018) ‘The explanatory potential of “dilemmas”: bridging practices and power to understand political change in interpretive political science’, Political Studies Review https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929918795342.Google Scholar
Geddes, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2018) ‘Towards an interpretive parliamentary studies’, in Brichzin, J., Krichewsky, D., Ringel, L. and Schank, J. (eds.) The Sociology of Parliaments. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, pp. 87–107.Google Scholar
Gee, J.P. (2004) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertz, C. (1973) ‘Thick description: toward an interpretive theory of culture’, In his The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, pp. 3–30.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1980) Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth Century Bali. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1983) ‘Blurred genres: the refiguration of social thought’, In his Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books, pp. 19–35.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (1988) Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Geertz, C. (2001) ‘The state of the art’, in his Available Light. Anthropological Reflections on Philosophical Topics, 3rd paperback ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 89–142.Google Scholar
George, A. L. and Bennett, A. (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2004) ‘What is a case study and what is it good for?’, American Political Science Review 98: 341–354.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2006) Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, J. (2007) ‘Is there a (viable) crucial-case method?’, Comparative Political Studies 40: 231–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, J. (2012a) Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2012b) ‘Mere description’, British Journal of Political Science 42(4): 721–746.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2017) ‘Qualitative methods’, Annual Review of Political Science 20: 15–36.Google Scholar
Geuijen, K., ‘t Hart, P. and Yesilkagit, K. (2007) ‘Dutch eurocrats at work: getting things done in Europe’, in Rhodes, R. A. W., ‘t Hart, P. and Noordegraaf, M. (eds.) Observing Government Elites: Up Close and Personal. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 131–159.Google Scholar
Gibson-Graham, J.-K. (2004) ‘Area studies after Poststructuralism’, Environment and Planning A36 (3): 405–419.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1993) New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretive Sociologies, 2nd ed. with a new Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (2017) [1967] The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Goertz, G. (2006) Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goertz, Gary, and Mahoney, James. (2012) A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goodsell, C. T. (1988) The Social Meaning of Civic Space: Studying Political Authority through Architecture. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Goodsell, C. T. (2001) The American Statehouse: Interpreting Democracy’s Temples . Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Greaves, J. and Grant, W. (2010) ‘Crossing the interdisciplinary divide: political science and biological science’, Political Studies 58 (2): 320–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, T., Russel, J., Ashcroft, R. and Parsons, W. (2011) ‘Why national health programs need dead philosophers: wittgensteinian reflections on policymakers’ reluctance to learn from history’, Milbank Quarterly 89: 533–563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Habermas, J. (1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haggard, S. and Kaufman, R. R. (2016)‚ ‘Democratization during the third wave’, Annual Review of Political Science 19: 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajer, M. A. (1996) The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. New ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hajer, M.A. (2009) Authoritative Governance: Policy Making in the Age of Mediatization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M. (1990) Reading Ethnographic Research: A Critical Guide. Harlow, Essex: Longman.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (2007) [1983] Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hay, C. (2011) ‘Interpreting interpretivism interpreting interpretations: the new hermeneutics of public administration’, Public Administration 89: 167–182.Google Scholar
Hay, C. (2017) ‘Explanation, prediction, causation – an unholy trinity? Appreciative comments on the philosophy and methods of political science’, Political Studies Review 15: 180–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heclo, H. (2010) [1974] Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden. Washington DC: Rowman & Littlefield International for the ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Hendriks, C. M. (2007) ‘Praxis stories: experiencing interpretive policy research’, Critical Policy Analysis 1: 278–300.Google Scholar
Hendriks, C. M. (2016) ‘Coupling citizens and elites in deliberative systems: the role of institutional design’, European Journal of Political Research 55 (1): 43–60.Google Scholar
Hendriks, C. M. (2017) ‘Citizen-led democratic reform: innovations in Indi’, Australian Journal of Political Science 52 (4): 481–499.Google Scholar
Herbert, R. E. (1988) Impressionism: Art, Leisure and Parisian Society. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hodgett, S. (in press) ‘21st Century area studies: blurring genres, evolutionary thought and the production of theory’, in Milutinovic, Z. (ed.) The Rebirth of Area Studies: Challenges for History, Politics and International Relations in the 21st Century. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
Hodgett, S. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (eds.) (in press) What Political Science Can Learn from the Humanities: Blurring Genres. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Isaac, J. C. (2015) ‘For a more public political science’, Perspectives on Politics 13 (2): 269–283.Google Scholar
Iusmen, I. and Boswell, J. (2017) ‘The dilemmas of pursuing “throughput legitimacy” through participatory mechanisms’, West European Politics 40 (2): 459–478.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, D., Maclean, L. M. and Read, B. L. (2015) Field Research in Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. and Beghetto, R. A. (2009) ‘Beyond big and little: the four C model of creativity’, Review of General Psychology 13 (1): 1–12.Google Scholar
King, G., Keohane, R. O and Verba, S. (1994) Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Klüver, H. (2009) ‘Measuring interest group influence using quantitative text analysis’, European Union Politics 10 (4): 535–549.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R. A. and Runco, M. A. (2010) ‘Theories of creativity’, in Kaufman, J. C. and Sternberg, R. J. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 20–47.Google Scholar
Kvale, S. and Brinkmann, S. (2009) Interviews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research. California: Sage.Google Scholar
Law, J. (1994) ‘Organization, narrative and strategy’, in Hassard, J. and Parker, M. (eds.) Towards a New Theory of Organizations. London: Routledge, pp. 248–268.Google Scholar
Law, J. (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1971) ‘Comparative politics and the comparative method’, American Political Science Review 65 (3): 682–693.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1985)Power-Sharing in South Africa (Berkeley: Institute of International Studies, University of California).Google Scholar
Lubet, S. (2018) Interrogating Ethnography: Why Evidence Matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, A. and Elman, C. (2014) ‘Openness in political science: data access and research transparency: Introduction’, PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 19–42.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. (1972) ‘Is a science of comparative politics possible?’, in Laslett, P., Runciman, W. G. and Skinner, Q. (eds.) Philosophy, Politics and Society, 4th series. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 8–26.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. (2007) After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 3rd rev. ed. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Mackay, F. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2013) ‘Gender, greedy institutions and the departmental court’, Public Administration 91: 582–598.Google Scholar
Malpass, J. (2013) ‘Hans-George Gadamer’, In The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/gadamer/ (accessed 5 March 2018).Google Scholar
Marcus, G. E. (1995) ‘Ethnography in/of the world system: the emergence of multi-sited ethnography’, Annual Review in Anthropology 24: 95–117.Google Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S. and Musheno, M. (2000) ‘State agent or citizen agent: two narratives of discretion’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10 (2): 329–358.Google Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S. and Musheno, M. (2003) Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFarlane, C. and Robinson, J. (2012) ‘Introduction: experiments in comparative urbanism’, Urban Geography 33: 765–773.Google Scholar
Newman, J. and Clarke, J. (2009) Publics, Politics and Power: Remaking the Public in Public Services. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Oakeshott, M. (1996) The Politics of Faith and the Politics of Scepticism. Edited by Fuller, T.. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
O’Malley, E. (2011) ‘Review of Comparing Westminster by R. A. W. Rhodes, John Wanna and Patrick Weller’, Political Studies Review 9: 67–141.Google Scholar
Orr, K. and Bennett, M. (2009) ‘Reflexivity in the co-production of academic-practitioner research’, Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 4(1): 85–102.Google Scholar
Ospina, S. and Dodge, J. (2005) ‘Narrative inquiry and the search for connectedness: practitioners and academics developing public administration scholarship’, Public Administration Review 65 (4): 409–423.Google Scholar
Pachirat, T. (2011) Every Twelve Seconds: Industrialized Slaughter and the Politics of Sight. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Perry, S. K. (1999) Writing in Flow: Keys to Enhanced Creativity. Writer’s Digest Books. www.writersdigest.com/.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1958) Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pouliot, V. (2014) ‘Practice tracing’, in his Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 237–259.Google Scholar
Pouliot, V. (2016) International Pecking Orders: The Politics and Practice of Multilateral Diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, D. (2014) ‘Resistance and the city’, History and Anthropology 25 (4): 472–487.Google Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (2009) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rawnsley, A. (2001) Servants of the People: The Inside Story of New Labour, rev. ed. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Reeher, G. (2006) First Person Political: Legislative Life and the Meaning of Public Service. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1975) The Councillor, Information and Urban Deprivation. Report to the Home Office, July 1975.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2011) Everyday Life in British Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2016) ‘Recovering the craft of public administration’, Public Administration Review 76 (4): 638–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2017) Interpretive Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. and Tiernan, A. (2014) The Gatekeepers. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W., Wanna, J. and Weller, P. (2009) Comparing Westminster. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ricci, D. (1984) The Tragedy of Political Science: Politics, Scholarship, and Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. (2011) ‘Cities in a world of cities: the comparative gesture’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 5 (1):1–23.Google Scholar
Sanjek, R. (1990) Fieldnotes: The Making of Anthropology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Savoie, D. (2008) Court Government and the Collapse of Accountability in Canada and the United Kingdom. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Schaffer, F. C. (2008) The Hidden Costs of Clean Election Reform. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Schaffer, F. C. (2015) Elucidating Social Science Concepts: An Interpretivist Guide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schmitter, P. C. (2009) ‘The nature and future of comparative politics’, European Political Science Review 1: 33–61.Google Scholar
Schwartz-Shea, P. and Yanow, D. (2012) Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and Processes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schwartz-Shea, P. and Yanow, D. (2016) ‘Legitimizing political science or splitting the discipline? Reflections on DA-RT and the policy-making role of a professional association’, Politics & Gender 12 (3): E11. DOI:10.1017/S1743923X16000428Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (1979) The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (1985) Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (1990) Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (2013) ‘Crops, Towns, Governments’, London Review of Books 35 (22): 13–15.Google Scholar
Seawright, J. and Gerring, J.(2008) ‘Case selection techniques in case study research: a menu of qualitative and quantitative options’, Political Research Quarterly 61: 294–308.Google Scholar
Simmons, E. S. and Smith, N. R. (2015) ‘The case for comparative ethnography’, Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 13 (2): 13–18. (We consulted the manuscript version accepted for Comparative Politics to be published in 2019.)Google Scholar
Simmons, E. S. and Smith, N. R. (2017) ‘Comparison with an ethnographic sensibility’, PS: Political Science & Politics 50: 126–130.Google Scholar
Soss, J. (2002) Unwanted Claims: The Politics of Participation in the US Welfare System. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Soss, J. (2018) ‘On the varied uses of concepts in interpretive research’, in Schaffer, F. C. (ed.) Symposium on Elucidating Social Science Concepts, European Political Science 17 (2): 319–324.Google Scholar
Soss, J., and Schram, S. F. (2007) ‘A public transformed? Welfare reform as policy feedback’, American Political Science Review, 101(1), 111–127.Google Scholar
Stone, D. (2016) ‘Quantitative analysis as narrative’, in Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Interpretive Political Science. New York: Routledge, pp. 157–170.Google Scholar
Sullivan, H. (2016) ‘Interpretivism and public policy research’, in Turnbull, N. (ed.) Interpreting Governance, High Politics, and Public Policy. London: Routledge, pp. 184–204.Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. and Feak, C. B. (2004) Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills, Vol. 1. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (2010) [1985] Philosophical Papers. Volume 1. Human Agency and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
t’ Hart, P. (2007) ‘Spies at the crossroads: observing change in the Dutch intelligence service’, in Rhodes, R. A. W., ‘t Hart, P. and Noordegraaf, M. (eds.) Observing Government Elites: Up Close and Personal. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 51–77.Google Scholar
Turnbull, N. (2016b) ‘Narrative and interpretive theory’, in Ansell, C. and Torfing, J. (eds.) Handbook on Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 380–391.Google Scholar
van Maanen, J. (1988) Tales of the Field: On Writing Ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Van Maanen, J. (2010) ‘A song for my supper: more tales of the field’, Organizational Research Methods 13: 240–255.Google Scholar
Veenendaal, W. P. and Corbett, J. (2015) ‘Why small states offer important answers to large questions’, Comparative Political Studies 48: 527–549.Google Scholar
Vrasti, W. (2008) ‘The strange case of ethnography and international relations’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies 37: 279–301.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, H. (2011) Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, H. (2012) ‘Dwellers on the threshold of practice: the interpretivism of Bevir and Rhodes’, Critical Policy Studies 6: 85–99.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, H. (2016) ‘Extending interpretivism: articulating the practice dimension in Bevir and Rhodes’s differentiated polity model’, in Turnbull, N. (ed.) Interpreting Governance, High Politics, and Public Policy. New York: Routledge, pp. 133–150.Google Scholar
Wedeen, L. (2007) ‘The Politics of deliberation: Qāt chews as public spheres in Yemen.’ Public Culture 19 (1): 59–84.Google Scholar
Wedeen, L. (2010) ‘Reflections on ethnographic work in political science’, Annual Review of Political Science 13: 255–272.Google Scholar
Weiss, R. S. (1995) Learning from Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Wesley-Smith, T and Goss, J. (2010) Remaking Area Studies: Teaching and Learning across Asia and the Pacific. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, A. (2010) [1993] Craftways: On the Organization of Scholarly Work. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Winch, P. (2002) The Idea of a Social Science: And Its Relation to Philosophy, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (2009) [1953] Philosophical Investigations, 4th ed. Edited by Hacker, P. M. S. and Schulte, J.. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wolgast, E. (1992) Ethics of an Artificial Person: Lost Responsibility in Professions and Organisations. Stanford, CA: Standford University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, E. J. (2007) ‘Field research’, in Boix, C. and Stokes, S. C. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 123–146.Google Scholar
Worley, R. M., Worley, V. B. and Wood, B. A. (2016) ‘There were ethical dilemmas all day long!’: harrowing tales of ethnographic researchers in criminology and criminal justice’, Criminal Justice Studies 29 (4): 289–308.Google Scholar
Wulff, H. (2002) ‘Yo-Yo fieldwork: mobility and time in multi-local study of dance in Ireland’, Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 11: 117–136.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2006) ‘Neither rigorous nor objective? Interrogating criteria for knowledge claims in interpretive science’, in Yanow, D. and Schwartz-Shea, P. (eds.) Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. ME Sharpe: New York, pp. 129–151.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2009) ‘Dear author, dear reader: the third hermeneutic in writing and reviewing ethnography’, in Schatz, E. (ed.) Political Ethnography. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, pp. 275–302.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2013) ‘How built spaces mean’, in Yanow, D. and Schwartz-Shea, P. (eds.) Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, 2nd ed. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 368–386.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2014) ‘Interpretive analysis and comparative research’, in Engeli, I. and Allison, C.R. (eds.) Comparative Policy Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 131–159.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. and Schwartz-Shea, P. (2006) (eds.) Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Zacka, B. (2017) When the State Meets the Street: Public Service and Moral Agency. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar