Page 117 - Comparing Political Communication Theories, Cases, and Challenge

P1: JZZ/KAA P2: KaF
0521828317c05.xml CY425/Esser 0521828317 May 22, 2004 11:55

Designs and Methods of Research

the comparability of results from emic studies have already been
mentioned.
(2) Committee approach: VandeVijver and Tanzer (1997, 266–7) rec-
ommend an international interdisciplinary group of experts of
the cultures, languages, and research field in question. This com-
mittee decides whether the instruments are to be formed culture-
specifically or whether a cultural adaptation will be sufficient.
(3) Dual-focus approach: This approach tries to find a compromise
between literal, grammatical, syntactical, and construct equiva-
lence. Native speakers and/or bilinguals should arrange the differ-
entlanguageversionstogetherwiththeresearchteaminacomplex
five-step procedure (Erkut et al. 1999, 210–15). This seems to be
the ideal, yet labor intensive way to an etic-emic set of instru-
ments that combines the highest levels of literal similarity and
culture-specific adaptation (Erkut et al. 1999, 216; Niedermayer
1997, 93–7).

Sampling of Cultures or Countries
In many international comparisons, the sampling of countries does
not follow any theoretical idea or criterion. Usually, the researchers use
personal preference and accessibility of data to select the countries to
study (Greenfield 1996, 309; similarly Kohn 1989a; Ragin 1989). This
kind of sample avoids many problems, but at the same time it ignores
theoretical advantages or representative sampling. In most cases, these
studies are pre- or atheoretical, because the research interest is not a
theoretical one.
If you want to select the countries or cultures in a systematic and
theory-driven way, Przeworski and Teune (1970, 32–43) suggest two
opposing approaches:
(1) The quasi-experimental most similar systems design tries to stress
culturaldifferences.Tominimizethepossiblecausesforthediffer-
ences, one should choose countries that are the “most similar,” so
that the few dissimilarities between these countries are most likely
to be the reason for the different outcomes. For example, the dif-
ferences between political participation in Sweden and Denmark
are surely less numerous and less severe than those between po-
litical participation in Sweden and Japan.
(2) Whenever the hypotheses highlight intercultural similarities, the
authorsproposetoselectthemostdifferentsystemsdesign.Inakind

97