John H. Goldthorpe,
Current Issues in Comparative Macrosociology: A debate on Methodlogical Issues, Comparative Social Research, Volume 16, 1997, pages 1-26.

Abstract

I seek in this chapter to intervene in what is in fact a rather long-standing debate. The contending parties in this debate are now usually characterized as exponents of quantitative, "variable-oriented" methodologies, on the one hand, and of qualitative, "case-oriented" methodologies, on the other. I shall, however, argue that that the debate has not been especially helpful in highlighting the most important issues, nor yet in pointing to ways in which they might be more effectively addressed.

I shall develop my position as follows. To begin with, I give a brief account of the contrast between variable-oriented and case-oriented approaches. I then pursue my central argument by considering three rather well-known methodological problems: the small N, the Galton and the Black box. These problems are ones that have in fact been chiefly discussed in connection with variable-oriented research. But, I aim to show, they are present to no less a degree in case-oriented studies and, contrary to what several prominent authors have maintained or implied, the latter can claim no special advantages in dealing with them. Largely on account of misconceptions in this regard, I conclude, much recent discussion has tended to obscure, and divert attention away from, questions of method that comparative macrosociology does now need to engage with more actively - in whatever style it may be carried out.