Communication Confidence Rating Scale for Aphasia

Communication Confidence Rating Scale for People with Aphasia (CCRS or CRSA)

CCRS
CRSA
Communication Confidence Scale

aphasia communication self-efficacy & confidence

Various (emerging self-report literature)

The Communication Confidence Rating Scale (CCRS or CRSA) is a brief self-report measure of perceived communication self-efficacy and confidence in communication situations among adults with aphasia. Unlike objective measures of language ability (Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination) or quality-of-life impact (Aphasia Impact Questionnaire), the CCRS focuses specifically on confidence—the degree to which a person with aphasia believes they can successfully communicate in everyday scenarios. High CCRS scores reflect psychological readiness to engage in communication despite linguistic deficits; low scores indicate anxiety and avoidance despite preserved communication ability.

Bays, C. L. (2003). Stroke Recovery: What Does the Literature Tell Us? Journal of Neuroscience Nursing, 35(5), 250–260.

Hersh, D., Worrall, L., O'Neill, G., Sherratt, S., & Hersh, D. (2012). 'I'm Not Aphonic, I'm Aphasic': Improving the Written Communication of People with Aphasia in Hospital. Aphasiology, 26(2), 175–188.

Hilari, K., Wiggins, R. D., Roy, P., Byng, S., & Smith, S. C. (2003). Predictors of Health-Related Quality of Life in People with Chronic Aphasia. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(2), 353–364.


Community Belonging Scale

Sense of Community and Belonging Assessment

Seymour Sarason, David McMillan, David Chavis

The Community Belonging Scale measures the subjective psychological sense of community—the feeling that one belongs, is accepted, and is valued within one's community. Distinct from objective measures of networks or participation, it captures the affective experience of community integration. Developed by Seymour Sarason and refined by McMillan and Chavis, it is grounded in community psychology and emphasizes that belonging is fundamental to mental health and social well-being.

Sarason, S. B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a community psychology. Jossey-Bass.

McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6-23.

Chipuer, H. M., & Pretty, G. M. (1999). A review of the empirical literature examining the association between social capital and mental health. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 6(6), 451-458.

social-cohesion-scale generalized-trust-scale civic-engagement-scale social-capital-index community-belonging-scale


Community Detection

Community Detection (Louvain, Girvan-Newman, Leiden, Infomap)

Topluluk Tespiti (Louvain, Girvan-Newman, Leiden)

Louvain: Blondel et al. (2008); Leiden: Traag et al. (2019); Girvan-Newman: Girvan & Newman (2002); Infomap: Rosvall & Bergstrom (2008)

Community detection is a family of graph-partitioning algorithms that discover densely connected sub-groups — communities — within a network. First formalised through the modularity measure by Girvan and Newman (2002), the field advanced rapidly with the Louvain method (Blondel et al., 2008), the Leiden refinement (Traag et al., 2019), and the information-theoretic Infomap approach. All variants answer the same question: which nodes cluster together more tightly among themselves than with the rest of the network?

Graph-partitioning / clustering algorithm family

Modularity optimisation (Louvain, Leiden), edge-betweenness removal (Girvan-Newman), information-flow compression (Infomap)

Output: Node-to-community assignment and modularity score Q

Blondel, V.D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R. & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast Unfolding of Communities in Large Networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics, 2008(10), P10008.

Traag, V.A., Waltman, L. & van Eck, N.J. (2019). From Louvain to Leiden: Guaranteeing Well-Connected Communities. Scientific Reports, 9, 5233.

exponential-random-graph stochastic-block-model centrality-analysis network-diffusion hierarchical-clustering


Community Integration Questionnaire

The Community Integration Questionnaire (CIQ) is a brief, validated instrument specifically designed to assess how well individuals with brain injury, spinal cord injury, or other disabling conditions have reintegrated into community life across home, social, and work domains. Originally developed in 1993 by Willer and colleagues, it operationalizes the WHO definition of 'participation' and has become the standard outcome measure in traumatic brain injury (TBI) rehabilitation and long-term follow-up studies.

Willer, B., Rosenthal, M., Kreutzer, J. S., Gordon, W. A., & Rempel, R. (1993). Assessment of community integration following rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 9(2), 75–87.

Willer, B., Ottenbacher, K. J., & Coad, M. L. (1994). The Community Integration Questionnaire: a comparative examination. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 73(2), 103–111.

whodas-2 impact-participation-autonomy reintegration-to-normal-living participation-scale craig-handicap-assessment


Comparative autoethnography

collaborative autoethnography
multi-sited autoethnography
cross-cultural autoethnography
CAE

1979 (autoethnography); comparative application formalized ~2013

Hayano (term); developed further by Ellis, Bochner, Chang, Ngunjiri & Hernandez

Comparative autoethnography is a qualitative design in which two or more researchers — or research participants — independently produce first-person self-narratives about a shared phenomenon and then systematically compare those accounts to generate broader cultural insight. By juxtaposing lived experiences that differ by context, identity, or setting, the approach moves beyond the single-voice limitations of traditional autoethnography while retaining its hallmark reflexivity and personal depth.

Personal narratives, field notes, journals, artefacts from multiple researchers or participants

Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F. W., & Hernandez, K.-A. C. (2013). Collaborative Autoethnography. Left Coast Press.

Ellis, C. (2004). The Ethnographic I: A Methodological Novel about Autoethnography. AltaMira Press.

autoethnography comparative-ethnography narrative-inquiry comparative-narrative-research comparative-case-study reflexive-thematic-analysis


Comparative Biographical Research

comparative biography
cross-case biographical analysis
biographical comparative method
comparative life-story research

Comparative biographical research is a qualitative design that gathers in-depth life-story accounts from multiple participants and systematically compares them to identify structural patterns, commonalities, and divergences across individual biographies. Rooted in the sociological life-history tradition, it moves beyond single-case description to generate broader theoretical insights about how social conditions, historical contexts, and personal agency shape individual trajectories.

Life-story interviews, biographical documents, personal narratives

Bertaux, D. (Ed.). (1981). Biography and Society: The Life History Approach in the Social Sciences. Sage.

Chamberlayne, P., Bornat, J., & Wengraf, T. (Eds.). (2000). The Turn to Biographical Methods in Social Science: Comparative Issues and Examples. Routledge.

biographical-research life-history-research comparative-narrative-research comparative-case-study oral-history narrative-inquiry


Comparative Case Law Analysis

cross-jurisdictional case analysis
comparative judicial analysis
transnational case law comparison
CCLA

Late 19th–20th century (systematic comparative law from ~1900; case-focused comparative methodology consolidated ~1970s–1990s)

Comparative law tradition (Zweigert, Kötz, MacCormick, Summers and others)

Comparative case law analysis is a qualitative legal research method that systematically examines and contrasts judicial decisions from two or more legal systems or jurisdictions. By placing rulings side by side, the method identifies convergences, divergences, and the underlying legal reasoning that shapes how courts address similar legal questions across different national or regional contexts.

Judicial decisions, court rulings, legal opinions across two or more jurisdictions

MacCormick, D. N., & Summers, R. S. (Eds.). (1991). Interpreting Statutes: A Comparative Study. Dartmouth.

Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd ed., T. Weir, Trans.). Oxford University Press.

case-law-analysis comparative-legal-analysis doctrinal-legal-research legal-content-analysis comparative-doctrinal-legal-research hermeneutic-analysis


Comparative Case Study

cross-case study
multi-site case study
multiple case study design
comparative case analysis

Comparative case study is a qualitative research design in which two or more bounded cases are studied in depth and then systematically compared to identify similarities, differences, and patterns across contexts. Rooted in Yin's replication logic and Stake's multiple case framework, it is particularly suited to questions that ask how or why a phenomenon unfolds differently — or similarly — across distinct settings, populations, or time periods.

Interviews, documents, observations, archival records (text and field data)

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Sage.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple Case Study Analysis. Guilford Press.

multiple-case-study single-case-study comparative-ethnography comparative-narrative-research cross-case-thematic-analysis qualitative-comparative-analysis


Comparative classic grounded theory

Glaserian comparative grounded theory
classic GT comparative design
comparative CGT
multi-site classic grounded theory

1967 (classic GT); comparative application formalised 1970s–1990s

Barney G. Glaser & Anselm L. Strauss (classic GT); comparative design extended by Glaser

Comparative classic grounded theory is a qualitative research design that applies Glaser and Strauss's original Glaserian grounded theory procedures across two or more deliberately selected comparison groups, settings, or time points. The constant comparative method — the analytical engine of classic GT — is extended systematically across sites so that the emerging substantive theory accounts for variation in the phenomenon across different contexts, populations, or conditions.

Interviews, field notes, documents, observational data across two or more comparative groups or sites

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine.

Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence vs Forcing. Sociology Press.


Comparative Confirmatory Research

Comparative Confirmatory Research Design

multigroup confirmatory research
cross-group confirmatory study
comparative hypothesis testing design
comparative model testing research

1971 (Jöreskog); systematized in organizational research by 2000

Karl Jöreskog (multigroup CFA foundation); Robert Vandenberg & Charles Lance (organizational application)

Comparative confirmatory research tests whether a pre-specified theoretical model or set of hypotheses holds equivalently across two or more distinct groups, time points, or contexts. It extends standard confirmatory analysis by explicitly imposing and evaluating equality constraints across groups, determining not only whether a model fits the data but whether its structure, factor loadings, and parameter estimates are comparable across populations. This design is foundational to cross-cultural, multi-site, and subgroup comparison studies.

Quantitative comparative research design

Quantitative (survey scales, psychometric instruments, observed variables)

Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.

Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika, 36(4), 409–426.

confirmatory-research comparative-research multivariate-confirmatory-research longitudinal-confirmatory-research hypothesis-testing-research model-testing-research


cross-group constructivist grounded theory

multi-site constructivist grounded theory

2000s (Charmaz 2000; extended comparatively through 2006–2014)

Kathy Charmaz (constructivist strand); comparative application developed in qualitative methodology literature

Comparative Constructivist Grounded Theory combines Kathy Charmaz's constructivist strand of grounded theory with an explicit comparative design, deliberately collecting and analyzing data from two or more groups, settings, or time points to build a theory that accounts for variation and similarity across contexts. The constructivist perspective treats categories and theory as co-constructed between researcher and participants rather than discovered objectively from data.

Interviews, field notes, documents (text data from multiple groups or sites)

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage.


Comparative Content analysis

cross-case content analysis
comparative textual analysis
CCA
comparative message analysis

1952 (Berelson); comparative application developed through 1970s–2000s

Bernard Berelson (foundational content analysis); Klaus Krippendorff (systematic methodology)

Comparative Content Analysis applies a shared coding framework to texts, documents, or media artifacts drawn from two or more groups, contexts, time points, or nations in order to identify similarities, differences, and patterns across those units of comparison. By holding the analytical lens constant while varying the comparison unit, it reveals how meaning, framing, or discourse differs across the cases under study.

Qualitative and/or quantitative comparative research design

Texts, documents, media artifacts, transcripts across two or more groups or contexts

Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (4th ed.). Sage.

Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The Content Analysis Guidebook (2nd ed.). Sage.

content-analysis qualitative-content-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis comparative-thematic-analysis critical-content-analysis longitudinal-content-analysis


Comparative Conversation Analysis

comparative CA
cross-contextual conversation analysis
comparative interactional analysis
comparative talk-in-interaction

1974 (CA foundation); comparative applications from 1980s–1990s

Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff, Gail Jefferson (CA foundation); comparative extension developed across the field from the 1980s onward

Comparative Conversation Analysis (comparative CA) applies the rigorous micro-analytic methods of Conversation Analysis across two or more contrasting interactional settings, languages, cultures, or participant groups. It examines how the sequential organisation of talk — turn-taking, repair, adjacency pairs, and action formation — varies or remains stable across contexts, producing cross-contextual evidence about the architecture of human interaction.

Qualitative micro-analytic research design

Audio/video recordings of naturally occurring talk, transcripts

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.

Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2012). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Wiley-Blackwell.

conversation-analysis discourse-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis critical-conversation-analysis comparative-critical-discourse-analysis interactional-sociolinguistics


Comparative Cross-Sectional Research

Comparative Cross-Sectional Research Design

comparative cross-sectional survey
cross-sectional comparative study
multi-group cross-sectional design
cross-sectional group comparison

Mid-20th century (widely formalized from 1950s onward)

Epidemiological tradition; formalized in observational study typologies

Comparative cross-sectional research is a quantitative observational design that measures and compares characteristics, attitudes, or outcomes across two or more pre-defined groups at a single point in time. By building the comparison into the sampling frame rather than treating it as a secondary analysis step, the design yields group-level contrasts without requiring follow-up measurement, making it efficient for describing between-group differences in prevalence, mean levels, or associations.

Quantitative survey, administrative records, or structured observational data

Kelsey, J. L., Whittemore, A. S., Evans, A. S., & Thompson, W. D. (1996). Methods in Observational Epidemiology (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage.

cross-sectional-research correlational-research longitudinal-research causal-comparative-research survey-research cohort-research


Comparative Descriptive Research

comparative survey design
descriptive comparative study
group-comparison descriptive research
CDR

Mid-20th century, formalized in research methods texts from the 1960s onward

Codified in educational and behavioral research methods literature; no single originator

Comparative descriptive research is a non-experimental quantitative design that systematically documents characteristics, attitudes, behaviors, or conditions across two or more naturally occurring groups, then places those descriptions side by side to identify similarities and differences. Unlike causal-comparative designs, it makes no claim about why groups differ — it rigorously answers the question 'How do these groups compare on this characteristic?' without manipulating any variable.

Non-experimental quantitative research design

Questionnaires, surveys, structured observation, secondary data (numeric or categorical)

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

descriptive-research survey-research cross-sectional-research causal-comparative-research correlational-research longitudinal-descriptive-research


Comparative Digital Ethnography

CDE
multi-site digital ethnography
cross-platform ethnography
comparative virtual ethnography

1995–2000 (multi-sited framework 1995; virtual ethnography 2000)

Christine Hine (digital ethnography); George E. Marcus (multi-sited ethnography)

Comparative Digital Ethnography (CDE) is a qualitative design that applies ethnographic methods — sustained participant observation, interview, and artefact analysis — across two or more digital settings simultaneously. By systematically comparing practices, meanings, and interactions in different online environments (e.g., distinct platforms, communities, or national contexts), CDE surfaces both site-specific patterns and cross-cutting cultural logics that a single-site study would miss.

Online field notes, digital artefacts, interviews, social media traces, forum posts

Hine, C. (2000). Virtual Ethnography. Sage.

Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.

ethnography digital-ethnography multi-site-ethnography netnography comparative-case-study thematic-analysis


Comparative Discourse Analysis

CDA comparative
cross-context discourse analysis
comparative text analysis
multi-site discourse analysis

1980s–1990s (established as comparative practice through the 1990s)

Norman Fairclough; Ruth Wodak; Teun A. van Dijk

Comparative discourse analysis examines how language constructs meaning, identity, and power by systematically contrasting texts or speech acts drawn from at least two distinct contexts, groups, time periods, or institutions. By holding analytical categories constant across cases, it reveals how discursive patterns diverge or converge, producing insights that single-context discourse analysis cannot generate.

Qualitative comparative research approach

Texts, transcripts, media content, policy documents, interviews

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Longman.

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.

discourse-analysis critical-discourse-analysis comparative-content-analysis comparative-thematic-analysis comparative-narrative-research critical-discourse-analysis


Comparative Doctrinal Legal Research

comparative-doctrinal method
cross-jurisdictional doctrinal analysis
comparative black-letter law research
CDLR

19th century origins; modern systematic form 1960s–1998

Rooted in classical comparative law (Anselm von Feuerbach, early 19th c.); systematised by Zweigert & Kötz (1998)

Comparative doctrinal legal research systematically identifies, expounds, and compares the legal rules, principles, and doctrines governing the same problem across two or more jurisdictions. It combines the internal rigour of doctrinal analysis — mapping the authoritative sources of a single legal system — with the external perspective of comparative law, asking whether different legal systems solve the same social problem in similar or divergent ways and why.

Primary legal sources (statutes, codes, case law, regulations) from two or more jurisdictions

Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd ed., T. Weir, Trans.). Oxford University Press.

Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N. (2012). Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research. Deakin Law Review, 17(1), 83–119.

doctrinal-legal-research comparative-legal-analysis case-law-analysis legal-content-analysis hermeneutic-analysis textual-criticism


Comparative Document Analysis

Comparative Qualitative Document Analysis

comparative documentary analysis
cross-document analysis
comparative textual analysis
comparative archival analysis

Mid-to-late 20th century; consolidated as explicit qualitative method by 2000s

Rooted in historical and social science documentary methods; systematised by scholars such as Lindsay Prior and Glenn Bowen

Comparative document analysis is a qualitative research design that systematically examines two or more documents — or document sets — side by side to identify similarities, differences, patterns, and contradictions across contexts, institutions, time periods, or jurisdictions. Drawing on document analysis as a primary method, the comparative dimension adds analytical leverage by allowing the researcher to ask not just what a document says, but how and why it differs from comparable documents elsewhere.

Documents (policy texts, reports, archives, official records, textbooks, media texts)

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40.

Prior, L. (2003). Using Documents in Social Research. Sage Publications.

document-analysis comparative-case-study comparative-content-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis thematic-analysis critical-document-analysis


Comparative Ethnography

multi-sited ethnography
cross-site ethnography
comparative field research
comparative participant observation

1987–1995 (systematic comparative ethnography formalized)

George E. Marcus (multi-sited formulation); Charles C. Ragin (comparative logic)

Comparative ethnography is a qualitative research design that conducts in-depth ethnographic fieldwork across two or more sites, groups, communities, or cultural settings in order to generate systematic comparisons. Rather than describing a single community in isolation, it traces similarities, differences, and interconnections across cases, producing theoretically grounded insights that no single site could yield alone.

Field notes, interviews, documents, observation records from multiple sites or groups

Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.

Ragin, C. C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of California Press.

ethnography digital-ethnography case-study multiple-case-study grounded-theory thematic-analysis


Comparative Explanatory Research

comparative explanation
explanatory comparative design
cross-case explanatory research
comparative causal analysis

1843 (Mill); contemporary social-science formalisation 1971–1987

John Stuart Mill (methods of agreement and difference, 1843); formalised in social science by Arend Lijphart and Charles Ragin

Comparative explanatory research is an observational design that systematically examines two or more groups, nations, organisations, or time points in order to explain why differences in outcomes occur. Rather than merely describing variation, it seeks causal or contributing mechanisms by holding some conditions constant while contrasting others — drawing on Mill's classical methods of agreement and difference.

Observational explanatory research design

Quantitative or mixed (survey data, administrative records, archival data across groups or cases)

Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative politics and the comparative method. American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–693.

comparative-case-study cross-sectional-survey quasi-experimental-design causal-comparative-research multiple-case-study survey-research


Comparative Exploratory Quantitative Research Design

exploratory comparative quantitative design

No single originator; codified in quantitative research methodology traditions (20th century)

Comparative exploratory quantitative research is a design that uses structured numerical data collection to discover patterns, differences, and relationships across two or more distinct groups or conditions — without a fully specified hypothesis in advance. It sits at the intersection of exploratory intent and comparative structure: the researcher does not enter the field with a predetermined answer but organises the inquiry around a comparison that will generate quantitative insights. The design is common in social, educational, and behavioural sciences when a phenomenon is insufficiently understood to permit confirmatory testing but structured group comparison is still feasible and informative.

Numerical / structured survey data across two or more comparison groups

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Babbie, E. (2016). The Practice of Social Research (14th ed.). Cengage Learning.

comparative-research exploratory-quantitative-research cross-sectional-research correlational-research descriptive-research survey-research


Comparative grounded theory

cross-site grounded theory
multi-group grounded theory
comparative GT
grounded theory comparative analysis

1967 (base); comparative application formalised from the 1980s onward

Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss (grounded theory base); comparative extension developed by multiple scholars

Comparative grounded theory applies the systematic inductive logic of grounded theory across two or more distinct groups, settings, or time points. Rather than generating a theory grounded in a single context, it builds theory that explains variation and similarity across contexts, producing conceptually richer and more transferable explanatory frameworks than single-site grounded theory studies.

Interviews, documents, field notes collected across two or more groups or contexts

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

grounded-theory comparative-case-study comparative-ethnography constructivist-grounded-theory comparative-thematic-analysis comparative-narrative-research


Comparative Hermeneutic Analysis

comparative hermeneutics
cross-textual hermeneutics
comparative interpretive analysis
CHA

Mid-20th century (Gadamer 1960; comparative extension developed 1970s–1990s)

Hans-Georg Gadamer; Paul Ricoeur; Wilhelm Dilthey (hermeneutic tradition); comparative extension by cross-cultural and comparative religion scholars

Comparative hermeneutic analysis is a qualitative method that applies hermeneutic interpretation across two or more texts, traditions, or discourses to reveal shared meanings, tensions, and divergences. Drawing on Gadamer's concept of the hermeneutic circle and Ricoeur's theory of text and meaning, it moves iteratively between the parts and the whole of each text while simultaneously holding multiple texts in dialogue, surfacing how different historical, cultural, or disciplinary contexts shape interpretation.

Texts, documents, narratives, historical records

Gadamer, H.-G. (1975). Truth and Method (G. Barden & J. Cumming, Trans.). Seabury Press. (Original work published 1960)

Ricoeur, P. (1981). Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation (J. B. Thompson, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge University Press.

hermeneutic-analysis textual-criticism comparative-textual-criticism discourse-analysis comparative-case-law-analysis phenomenology


Comparative Historical Archival Research

comparative-historical analysis
cross-national archival research
comparative archival history
CHAR

Late 19th century (archival foundations); mid-20th century (comparative systematic application)

Leopold von Ranke (archival history); Theda Skocpol, Barrington Moore (comparative-historical synthesis)

Comparative historical archival research combines systematic examination of primary archival sources across two or more historical cases — nations, regions, institutions, or time periods — to identify causal patterns, structural similarities, and divergences that single-case histories cannot reveal. It is the method of choice when researchers want to explain why similar or different outcomes emerged across distinct historical contexts using documentary evidence.

Primary archival documents, state records, correspondence, administrative files, secondary historical sources

Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press.

Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (2015). Comparative-historical analysis in contemporary political science. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Advances in Comparative-Historical Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

historical-archival-research comparative-case-study process-tracing oral-history-method document-analysis comparative-legal-analysis


Comparative Institutional Ethnography

CIE
comparative IE
multi-site institutional ethnography
cross-institutional ethnography

1987 (IE origin); comparative applications developed 1990s–2000s

Dorothy E. Smith (IE foundation); comparative extension by subsequent IE scholars

Comparative Institutional Ethnography (CIE) extends Dorothy Smith's institutional ethnography to two or more institutional settings, revealing how texts, ruling relations, and coordinated work practices operate across different organizational contexts. By holding the standpoint of workers or clients constant while varying the institutional site, CIE exposes both the shared ideological mechanisms and the local divergences that shape everyday experience within institutions such as hospitals, schools, welfare agencies, or courts.

Qualitative multi-site institutional design

Interviews, documents, texts, observational field notes from two or more institutional sites

Smith, D. E. (2005). Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. AltaMira Press.

DeVault, M. L., & McCoy, L. (2006). Institutional ethnography: Using interviews to investigate ruling relations. In D. E. Smith (Ed.), Institutional Ethnography as Practice (pp. 15–44). Rowman & Littlefield.


multi-group interpretative phenomenological analysis

1996 (IPA); comparative applications prominent from 2000s onward

Jonathan A. Smith (IPA); comparative extension by IPA research community

Comparative Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (Comparative IPA) applies the IPA framework — developed by Jonathan A. Smith — to examine and contrast the lived experiences of two or more distinct groups or individuals. Rather than producing a single composite description, it preserves within-group detail and then performs a principled cross-group comparison, revealing how the same phenomenon is experienced differently depending on context, identity, or circumstance.

In-depth interview transcripts, focus group data

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. Sage.

Larkin, M., Watts, S., & Clifton, E. (2006). Giving voice and making sense in interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 102–120.


Comparative Legal Analysis

comparative law
legal comparison
comparative jurisprudence
CLA

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (early conceptualisation); Raymond Saleilles and Édouard Lambert (modern discipline, 1900 Paris Congress)

Comparative legal analysis is a structured research method that examines how two or more legal systems — whether national, regional, or supranational — address a common legal problem. By placing rules, doctrines, and judicial decisions side by side, researchers identify convergences, divergences, and the underlying societal, historical, and political forces that shape legal solutions. The method is foundational to law reform, harmonisation efforts, treaty drafting, and academic legal scholarship.

Legal texts (statutes, codes, case law, regulations, legal doctrine)

Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd ed., T. Weir, Trans.). Oxford University Press.

doctrinal-legal-research case-law-analysis legal-content-analysis hermeneutic-analysis historical-archival-research textual-criticism


Comparative Life history research

comparative life history
cross-case life history
comparative biographical method
comparative biographical life history

1920s (life history origins); comparative variant prominent from 1980s–1990s

Ivor Goodson; influenced by C. Wright Mills and W. I. Thomas & Florian Znaniecki

Comparative life history research is a qualitative approach that collects extended first-person accounts of individuals' lives across two or more cases, groups, or social contexts, then systematically compares these accounts to identify shared patterns, divergences, and the social forces that shape biographical trajectories. It bridges the depth of life history with the analytical leverage of cross-case comparison, making it especially powerful for understanding how social structure, culture, or institutional context shapes individual experience over time.

Narrative interviews, life documents, diaries, letters

Goodson, I. F. (Ed.). (1992). Studying Teachers' Lives. Routledge.

Cole, A. L., & Knowles, J. G. (2001). Lives in Context: The Art of Life History Research. AltaMira Press.

life-history-research biographical-research narrative-inquiry comparative-narrative-research oral-history comparative-case-study


Comparative Longitudinal Research

Comparative Longitudinal Research Design

longitudinal comparative design
comparative panel design
multi-group longitudinal study
longitudinal cross-national comparison

Mid-20th century onward; systematized in sociological and developmental research by the 1960s–1970s

Developed across social science and educational research traditions; no single originator

Comparative longitudinal research tracks two or more distinct groups across multiple time points, enabling researchers to observe how outcomes change over time and whether those trajectories differ between groups. By combining the temporal depth of longitudinal design with the between-group contrast of comparative design, this approach can detect not only whether groups differ at any single moment but also whether they diverge, converge, or evolve at different rates across the observation window.

Quantitative observational research design

Repeated-measures numeric data collected from two or more distinct groups at multiple time points

Menard, S. (2002). Longitudinal Research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Bijleveld, C. C. J. H., & van der Kamp, L. J. T. (1998). Longitudinal Data Analysis: Designs, Models and Methods. Sage Publications.

longitudinal-research comparative-research panel-research cohort-research cross-sectional-research growth-curve-modeling


Comparative Method

Comparative Historical Linguistics Method

Historical Comparative Linguistics
Genetic Linguistics

The Comparative Method is a foundational technique in historical linguistics for reconstructing ancestral languages and establishing genetic relationships between related languages. Pioneered by Sir William Jones in 1786, it systematically compares phonological, morphological, and lexical features across languages to identify regular sound correspondences and trace their shared origins. This method underpins modern historical linguistics and has been essential for understanding language families worldwide.

Hock, H. H. (1991). Principles of Historical Linguistics (2nd ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Campbell, L. (1998). Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Greenberg, J. H. (1953). Historical linguistics and unwritten languages. In A. L. Kroeber (Ed.), Anthropology Today. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

internal-reconstruction glottochronology dialectometry corpus-linguistics


Comparative Model Testing Research

comparative model comparison
cross-group model testing
competing model comparison research
comparative structural model evaluation

Rooted in structural equation modeling traditions; formalized through Jöreskog (1969) and extended by Vandenberg & Lance (2000)

Comparative model testing research is a quantitative design in which two or more theoretically motivated models — or the same model evaluated across distinct groups or conditions — are systematically tested and compared using fit indices, likelihood-ratio tests, or information criteria. The goal is to determine which model better represents the data structure, or whether a model's parameter structure holds equally across comparison groups.

Quantitative confirmatory-comparative research design

Multivariate quantitative data (scales, latent constructs, observed indicators)

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.

confirmatory-research model-testing-research comparative-research hypothesis-testing-research cross-sectional-correlational-research comparative-confirmatory-research


Comparative Multiple case study

Comparative Multiple Case Study Research

multi-site case study
cross-case analysis
comparative case research
multi-case comparative design

1984 (Yin); 2006 (Stake multiple-case analysis)

Comparative multiple case study is a qualitative research design in which two or more bounded cases are studied in depth and then systematically compared to identify patterns, contrasts, and transferable findings. Rooted in Robert Yin's case study methodology and Robert Stake's multiple-case analysis framework, it combines the rich contextual insight of single-case work with the analytical leverage gained by examining how phenomena unfold similarly or differently across distinct settings.

Interviews, documents, observations, archival records (multiple sites)

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Sage.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple Case Study Analysis. Guilford Press.

multiple-case-study single-case-study comparative-case-study comparative-narrative-research cross-case-synthesis comparative-ethnography


Comparative Narrative Research

comparative narrative inquiry
cross-case narrative research
narrative comparison
comparative narrative analysis

D. Jean Clandinin & F. Michael Connelly (narrative inquiry); comparative extension by the broader qualitative comparative tradition

Comparative narrative research is a qualitative design that collects personal stories or life accounts from two or more participants, groups, or contexts and systematically compares them to reveal patterns, contrasts, and contextual influences. Drawing on narrative inquiry's attention to experience-as-story, it adds a deliberate comparative logic to identify what is shared, what diverges, and why differences emerge across cases.

Narrative interviews, life stories, autobiographical accounts, documents

Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research. Jossey-Bass.

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. Sage.

narrative-inquiry comparative-case-study comparative-thematic-analysis comparative-phenomenology biographical-research life-history-research


Comparative Netnography

cross-community netnography
multi-site netnography
comparative online ethnography
comparative virtual ethnography

Late 1990s–2000s (netnography ~1997; comparative extension ~2000s–2010s)

Robert V. Kozinets (netnography); comparative extension through multi-site online fieldwork practice

Comparative netnography applies netnographic methods systematically across two or more online communities, platforms, or cultural contexts to reveal both shared and divergent patterns in online social life. Grounded in Kozinets's netnographic tradition, it extends single-site online ethnography into a comparative logic: the researcher immerses in multiple digital field sites, gathers culturally embedded data, and analyses across sites to generate theoretically richer, transferable insights.

Online text, images, videos, user-generated content from multiple communities

Kozinets, R. V. (2010). Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. Sage.

Kozinets, R. V. (2019). Netnography: The Essential Guide to Qualitative Social Media Research (3rd ed.). Sage.

netnography comparative-ethnography digital-ethnography comparative-discourse-analysis comparative-thematic-analysis virtual-ethnography


Comparative Oral history

comparative oral history
cross-group oral history
comparative oral testimony
multi-site oral history

1970s–1990s (oral history discipline; comparative application developed through 1990s)

Alessandro Portelli, Paul Thompson (oral history tradition); comparative design adapted from cross-cultural qualitative research

Comparative oral history collects and systematically compares first-person spoken testimonies from two or more distinct groups, communities, or historical contexts. The method blends the interpretive depth of oral history — privileging personal memory and narrative — with the analytical logic of comparative design, enabling researchers to identify both shared patterns and meaningful differences across the groups under study.

Recorded and transcribed oral testimony, interviews, personal narratives

Portelli, A. (1991). The Death of Luigi Trastulli and Other Stories: Form and Meaning in Oral History. State University of New York Press.

Thompson, P. (2000). The Voice of the Past: Oral History (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

oral-history comparative-narrative-research comparative-case-study life-history-research comparative-biographical-research comparative-ethnography


Comparative Panel Research

pooled cross-sectional time-series design

1970s–1980s (formal integration of comparative and panel designs)

Developed across social science disciplines; seminal formalizations by Cheng Hsiao (panel econometrics) and Melvin Kohn (comparative sociology)

Comparative panel research tracks the same individuals, organizations, or macro-level units (e.g., countries, regions) across multiple time points while simultaneously comparing findings across two or more distinct groups or contexts. By combining the temporal depth of panel measurement with the analytical leverage of systematic comparison, this design can distinguish change processes that are universal from those that are context-specific — a capability neither pure panel nor single-sample longitudinal designs offer on their own.

Quantitative longitudinal comparative design

Repeated-measures numeric data from multiple distinct groups, countries, or units

Hsiao, C. (2014). Analysis of Panel Data (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Kohn, M. L. (1987). Cross-national research as an analytic strategy. American Sociological Review, 52(6), 713–731.

panel-research longitudinal-research comparative-research cross-sectional-research cohort-research multilevel-modeling


Comparative phenomenology

cross-group phenomenology
multi-group phenomenological study
comparative phenomenological inquiry
contrastive phenomenology

Late 20th century (comparative applications prominent from the 1980s–1990s onward)

Edmund Husserl (foundational); systematised in comparative application by Amedeo Giorgi, Max van Manen, and others

Comparative phenomenology applies phenomenological inquiry to two or more distinct groups, cultures, or contexts, explicitly contrasting how each group lives through and makes meaning of a shared phenomenon. Rather than describing a single unified essence, it reveals both common structures and meaningful differences in lived experience across comparison units. The approach is grounded in Husserlian and hermeneutic phenomenology but extends the standard single-group design into a structured cross-group analysis.

In-depth interviews, focus groups, written accounts (text data from two or more contrasting groups or contexts)

van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. State University of New York Press.

Giorgi, A. (2009). The Descriptive Phenomenological Method in Psychology: A Modified Husserlian Approach. Duquesne University Press.

phenomenology hermeneutic-phenomenology interpretive-phenomenological-analysis comparative-case-study cross-cultural-research thematic-analysis


Comparative Qualitative content analysis

Comparative Qualitative Content Analysis

multi-context qualitative content analysis

comparative interpretive content analysis

1983 (Mayring's QCA foundation); comparative adaptations prominent from 2000s onward

Philipp Mayring (qualitative content analysis); comparative application developed across communication, policy, and social science research

Comparative qualitative content analysis (comparative QCA) applies a systematic, category-driven reading of texts or documents across two or more cases, groups, time periods, or cultural contexts, with the explicit goal of identifying similarities, differences, and patterns that emerge from the comparison. It combines the interpretive rigour of qualitative content analysis with a structured comparative logic, making it valuable for cross-national policy research, media studies, and any inquiry that requires principled comparison of meaning across contexts.

Qualitative research design and analysis strategy

Textual documents, interview transcripts, media content, policy texts across multiple cases or groups

Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Sage.

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), Art. 20.

qualitative-content-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis comparative-thematic-analysis comparative-case-study critical-qualitative-content-analysis comparative-narrative-research


Comparative Quantitative Content Analysis

CQCA
cross-national content analysis
comparative media content analysis
systematic comparative content analysis

1952 (Berelson); comparative extensions prominent from 1980s onward

Bernard Berelson (quantitative content analysis); Kimberly Neuendorf (codebook systematization); Hallin & Mancini (comparative media application)

Comparative quantitative content analysis is a systematic, replicable method for counting and categorizing features of communication content — such as news coverage, social media posts, or policy documents — across two or more groups, time periods, outlets, or countries. By applying a standardized codebook to each comparison context, it reveals patterns of similarity and difference in how topics, frames, actors, or sentiments are represented, and allows statistical testing of those differences.

Textual, visual, or audiovisual content (documents, news articles, social media posts, broadcasts)

Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research. Free Press.

Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. Sage.


Comparative Reflexive Thematic Analysis

comparative qualitative thematic comparison

2006 (reflexive TA); comparative application formalised ~2019–2021

Comparative Reflexive Thematic Analysis (CRTA) applies Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis framework to data drawn from two or more distinct groups, time points, or contexts, with the explicit goal of contrasting thematic patterns across those groups. The reflexive element means the analyst continuously interrogates how their own perspectives and positioning shape the themes they construct, while the comparative element directs attention to differences and similarities between data sets rather than seeking a single unified account.

Interview transcripts, focus group transcripts, documents, open-ended survey responses

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

reflexive-thematic-analysis thematic-analysis framework-analysis comparative-case-study cross-case-analysis qualitative-content-analysis


Comparative Relational Survey

comparative correlational survey
multi-group relational survey
cross-group relational survey design

Mid-20th century onward; systematized in educational research c. 1960s–1990s

Rooted in survey methodology tradition; formalized by scholars such as Fraenkel, Wallen, and Creswell

A comparative relational survey is a quantitative, non-experimental design that examines the relationships among variables within a single study while simultaneously comparing those relationship patterns across two or more distinct groups. It extends a standard relational (correlational) survey by adding a comparative dimension, revealing whether associations observed in one group hold, differ, or even reverse in another. It is widely used in education, psychology, organizational behavior, and health sciences.

Quantitative non-experimental survey design

Numeric scores, Likert-scale responses, or other quantitative survey measures from two or more comparison groups

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2009). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

relational-survey comparative-survey-research correlational-research cross-sectional-correlational-research causal-comparative-research multivariate-correlational-research


Comparative Semiotic Analysis

cross-cultural semiotics
comparative sign analysis
comparative semiology
CSA

Early 20th century (Saussure 1916; Peirce c. 1900); comparative framing consolidated from 1970s onward

Ferdinand de Saussure (semiology), Charles Sanders Peirce (semiotics); comparative application developed across cultural and communication studies

Comparative semiotic analysis examines how signs, symbols, and meaning-making systems operate across two or more contexts — such as different cultures, historical periods, media platforms, or social groups. By applying semiotic frameworks (denotation, connotation, myth, codes, paradigms) systematically across parallel corpora, researchers reveal how the same sign produces different meanings, how ideologies are encoded differently, or how symbolic structures converge and diverge across settings.

Texts, images, advertisements, media artifacts, cultural symbols, discourse samples from two or more contexts

Chandler, D. (2007). Semiotics: The Basics (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies. Hill and Wang. (Original work published 1957, trans. A. Lavers).

semiotic-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis comparative-content-analysis comparative-visual-analysis critical-semiotic-analysis interpretive-semiotic-analysis


Comparative Straussian Grounded Theory

comparative grounded theory (Straussian)

1967 (discovery); systematic Straussian procedures codified 1990/1998

Anselm Strauss & Juliet Corbin (Straussian GT); comparative extension built on Glaser & Strauss (1967)

Comparative Straussian Grounded Theory applies the systematic open–axial–selective coding framework of Strauss and Corbin across two or more purposively selected contexts, groups, or sites to generate theory that explains both within-context processes and cross-context variation. The constant comparative method — the analytic engine first described by Glaser and Strauss (1967) — is elevated to a deliberate design-level strategy, allowing researchers to build mid-range theory that accounts for how social processes unfold differently under varying conditions.

Interviews, observations, documents (text and field notes) across multiple contexts

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine.


Comparative Survey Research

comparative survey design
cross-group survey
multi-group survey research
comparative questionnaire study

Rooted in survey methodology traditions (Gallup, Likert, Lazarsfeld mid-20th century); comparative extension codified in social science research methods literature

Comparative survey research is a quantitative non-experimental design that systematically collects structured survey data from two or more clearly defined groups, populations, or contexts in order to identify, describe, and analyze similarities and differences among them. It extends basic survey research by making comparison the explicit organizing logic: rather than characterizing a single population, the goal is to detect how attitudes, behaviors, or outcomes vary across groups defined by nationality, culture, profession, demographic category, or time period.

Quantitative non-experimental research design

Structured survey data (Likert scales, closed-ended items, numeric responses) from two or more groups or populations

Fowler, F. J. (2014). Survey Research Methods (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

Babbie, E. (2016). The Practice of Social Research (14th ed.). Cengage Learning.

survey-research cross-sectional-research causal-comparative-research longitudinal-survey-research descriptive-research correlational-research


Comparative Thematic Analysis

comparative qualitative thematic analysis

2000s–2010s (as an explicit comparative variant of thematic analysis)

Virginia Braun & Victoria Clarke (thematic analysis foundation); comparative extension developed in applied policy and cross-cultural qualitative research traditions

Comparative Thematic Analysis applies the structured procedures of thematic analysis across two or more distinct groups, sites, or time points, with the explicit aim of identifying both shared patterns and meaningful differences. Rather than producing a single composite account of experience, it yields a layered analysis that maps where themes converge and diverge across comparison units — making it especially valuable for policy-relevant, cross-cultural, or multi-site qualitative studies.

Qualitative comparative analytical strategy

Interview transcripts, focus group records, documents — across two or more groups, sites, or contexts

Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data (pp. 173–194). Routledge.

thematic-analysis reflexive-thematic-analysis comparative-case-study comparative-content-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis framework-analysis


Comparative Trend Research

comparative trend study
multi-group trend study
cross-group trend analysis
comparative longitudinal survey

1970s–1990s (formalized alongside longitudinal and trend designs)

Developed within the survey research tradition; comparative extension attributed broadly to Babbie, Creswell, and related methodologists

Comparative trend research is a quantitative non-experimental design that tracks changes in one or more variables over time within two or more distinct groups or populations. By drawing independent cross-sectional samples from each group at multiple time points, it reveals whether trends diverge, converge, or differ in magnitude across groups — answering not just 'is this changing?' but 'is it changing differently for different populations?'

Repeated cross-sectional survey data from two or more groups

Creswell, J. W. (2002). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Babbie, E. R. (1990). Survey Research Methods (2nd ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.

trend-research longitudinal-research comparative-research cross-sectional-research cohort-research panel-research


Comparative Typological Analysis

cross-typological comparison
typological comparative method
comparative typology
CTA

Late 19th–early 20th century (formalized across disciplines)

Various (Linnaeus in biology; Franz Boas, Edward Sapir in anthropology/linguistics; Gordon Childe in archaeology)

Comparative typological analysis is a systematic method for classifying phenomena into types and then examining how those types differ, overlap, or share structural features across multiple cases, contexts, or cultures. Widely applied in linguistics, archaeology, law, and the social sciences, it moves beyond single-case typology by placing type systems in dialogue with one another to identify cross-cutting patterns, universals, or culturally specific configurations.

Artifacts, texts, linguistic forms, institutional categories, cultural objects

Comrie, B. (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology: Syntax and Morphology (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.

Adams, W. Y., & Adams, E. W. (1991). Archaeological Typology and Practical Reality: A Dialectical Approach to Artifact Classification and Sorting. Cambridge University Press.


Comparative Visual analysis

cross-case visual analysis
comparative image analysis
comparative visual methods
CVA

1986–2001 (systematic codification in social research)

Gillian Rose (systematic visual methods); John Collier Jr. (visual anthropology)

Comparative Visual Analysis is a qualitative research design that systematically examines and compares visual materials — photographs, videos, artworks, advertisements, or digital images — across two or more cases, groups, time points, or contexts. By applying a consistent analytical framework to multiple visual corpora, the approach reveals similarities, differences, and patterns that would remain invisible when studying a single set of images alone.

Photographs, film, video, artwork, advertisements, social media images, diagrams

Rose, G. (2016). Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials (4th ed.). Sage.

Collier, J., & Collier, M. (1986). Visual Anthropology: Photography as a Research Method. University of New Mexico Press.

visual-analysis comparative-content-analysis comparative-discourse-analysis semiotic-analysis comparative-ethnography multimodal-analysis


Professional Quality of Life Scale

Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) / Compassion Fatigue Scale

ProQOL
ProQOL-5
Compassion Fatigue Scale

Occupational wellbeing and compassion fatigue in helping professions

The ProQOL is a 30-item self-report instrument measuring both negative (compassion fatigue, secondary traumatic stress) and positive (compassion satisfaction) dimensions of occupational wellbeing in helping professionals. Developed by Stamm in 2005, the ProQOL conceptualizes professional quality of life holistically—capturing not only the burden of helping work but also its rewards and meaning. The scale is widely used in occupational health research, organizational assessment, and intervention evaluation across healthcare, mental health, social services, and disaster response fields.

Stamm, B. H. (2010). The Concise ProQOL Manual (2nd ed.). ProQOL.org.

Stamm, B. H. (2005). The ProQOL: A tool to measure compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction. In C. A. Figley (Ed.), Treating compassion fatigue (pp. 29-48). Brunner-Routledge.


Competing Risks Analysis

Rekabet Eden Riskler Analizi
cumulative incidence function
CIF analysis
cause-specific survival analysis

Competing risks analysis, formalized by Fine and Gray in 1999, is a survival analysis framework for settings where a subject can experience one of several mutually exclusive event types. The key quantity is the cumulative incidence function (CIF), which estimates the probability of a specific event occurring by time t in the presence of the other competing events.

Fine, J.P. & Gray, R.J. (1999). A Proportional Hazards Model for the Subdistribution of a Competing Risk. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(446), 496–509.

kaplan-meier fine-gray-competing-risks cox-ph nelson-aalen log-rank-test bayesian-survival


Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2

Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2)

Rainer Martens, Robin Vealey, Damon Burton

The CSAI-2 is a 27-item instrument measuring three dimensions of state anxiety in sport: cognitive anxiety (worry), somatic anxiety (physiological arousal), and self-confidence. Developed by Martens and colleagues in 1990, it has become the gold standard for assessing pre-competition psychological state and is widely used in sport psychology research, coaching, and athlete support.

Martens, R., Vealey, R. S., Burton, D., Bump, L. A., & Smith, D. E. (1990). Development and validation of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2. In R. Martens, R. S. Vealey, & D. Burton (Eds.), Competitive Anxiety in Sport (pp. 193–218). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

profile-of-mood-states sport-anxiety-scale sport-confidence-inventory mental-toughness-questionnaire


Completely Randomized Design

CRD
completely randomised design
one-way experimental design
Tam Tesadüf Deneme Deseni (CRD)

The completely randomized design is the most fundamental experimental design, in which experimental units are assigned to treatments entirely at random with no restrictions. Analysed by one-way ANOVA, it was formalised by R. A. Fisher in the 1930s and remains the reference starting point for experimental research whenever the experimental material is homogeneous and nuisance variation is absent or negligible.

Parametric group comparison via one-way ANOVA

Montgomery, D.C. (2017). Design and Analysis of Experiments. Wiley.

Cochran, W.G. & Cox, G.M. (1957). Experimental Designs. Wiley.

randomized-complete-block-design one-way-anova factorial-design kruskal-wallis tukey-hsd


Component GARCH

Component GARCH decomposes conditional variance into transitory (short-term) and permanent (long-term) components with different dynamics, allowing flexibility in capturing volatility behavior at multiple frequencies. Introduced by Engle and Lee (1999), it elegantly models the empirical finding that volatility exhibits both rapid mean-reversion (daily shocks) and slow mean-reversion (level shifts). This framework is crucial for understanding volatility persistence and improving long-horizon volatility forecasting.

Engle, R. F., & Lee, G. (1999). A permanent and transitory component model of stock return volatility. Journal of Political Economy, 107(6), 1363-1384.

Ling, S., & McAleer, M. (2003). Asymptotic theory and inference for dynamic conditional distribution models. Journal of Econometrics, 106(1), 119-135.


Compositional Data Analysis

CoDA
Simplex Analysis
Log-Ratio Analysis
Bileşim Veri Analizi

Compositional Data Analysis (CoDA) is a branch of multivariate statistics designed for data that represent parts of a whole — proportions, percentages, or concentrations that sum to a constant. Introduced by John Aitchison in his landmark 1982 paper, CoDA recognises that standard Euclidean methods fail on the simplex and instead operates through log-ratio transformations that respect the relative nature of compositional information.

Constrained multivariate statistical method

Aitchison, J. (1982). The statistical analysis of compositional data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 44(2), 139–177.


Compressive Sensing

Compressive Sensing (Compressed Sensing) Signal Acquisition

Compressed Sensing
CS
Sparse Recovery
Sub-Nyquist Sampling

Compressive Sensing (CS) is a signal acquisition and reconstruction technique that exploits signal sparsity to recover high-resolution signals from far fewer samples than required by the Nyquist sampling theorem. Developed by Emmanuel Candès, Justin Romberg, and Terence Tao in 2006, compressive sensing challenges the traditional sampling paradigm by showing that signals with sparse representations can be reconstructed from sub-Nyquist random measurements using nonlinear optimization.

Candes, E. J., Romberg, J., & Tao, T. (2006). Robust Uncertainty Principles: Exact Signal Reconstruction from Highly Incomplete and Inaccurate Measurements. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(2), 489–509.

Eldar, Y. C., & Kutyniok, G. (2012). Compressed Sensing: Theory and Applications. Cambridge University Press.

fir-filter-design short-time-fourier-transform power-spectral-density adaptive-lms-filter


COMPROMISE-PROGRAMMING

COMPROMISE-PROGRAMMING (Compromise Programming — Lp-metric distance to ideal solution) is a ranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method introduced by Zeleny, M. in 1973. It turns a decision matrix of alternatives scored on multiple criteria into a structured, reproducible result.

Distance-based — Lp metric to Pareto-optimal ideal (parametric p)

Zeleny, M. (1973). Compromise programming. In: Multiple Criteria Decision Making (Cochrane & Zeleny, eds.), Univ. of South Carolina Press

ahp anp bwm bwm-bayesian ccsd cilos cimas critic


Computer Anxiety Scale

The Computer Anxiety Rating Scale (CARS) was developed by Rosen, Sears, and Weil in 1987 to measure the emotional distress and fear individuals experience when thinking about using computers or engaging with computer technology. CARS is a foundational instrument in understanding psychological barriers to technology adoption and has been widely applied across education, workplace training, and organizational digital transformation contexts.

Rosen, L. D., Sears, D. C., & Weil, M. M. (1987). Computerphobia. Journal of School Psychology, 25(3), 221-232.

Weil, M. M., & Rosen, L. D. (1995). The psychological impact of technology from a historical perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 3-15.

technology-readiness-index online-trust-scale technostress-scale tam-questionnaire


Computerized adaptive test construct validity

Construct Validity in Computerized Adaptive Testing

CAT construct validity
adaptive test construct validation
CAT validity evidence
construct validity evidence in CAT

Samuel Messick (unified validity framework); CAT application formalized by Wainer, van der Linden, and colleagues

Construct validity in computerized adaptive testing evaluates whether the latent trait estimates produced by a CAT instrument genuinely measure the intended psychological or educational construct. Because adaptive algorithms select items individually for each examinee, the validity evidence gathered must account for the variable item exposure and the IRT-based scoring that are unique to CAT administrations.

Validity evaluation / psychometric evidence gathering

Item response data from adaptive administrations; latent trait estimates; fit statistics

Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). American Council on Education / Macmillan.

van der Linden, W. J. & Glas, C. A. W. (Eds.). (2010). Elements of Adaptive Testing. Springer.


Computerized Adaptive Test Content Validity

Content Validity in Computerized Adaptive Testing

CAT content validity
adaptive item bank content coverage
content balancing in CAT
CAT blueprint validity

Lawshe (content validity); Lord & Weiss (CAT framework)

Content validity in computerized adaptive testing (CAT) ensures that an adaptively administered assessment adequately samples the intended content domain despite delivering only a subset of items to each examinee. It integrates classical content validity methods with CAT-specific item bank design and content balancing algorithms to guarantee representative domain coverage at both the item bank and the individual test level.

Expert ratings, item metadata, item bank blueprints

Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575.


Computerized Adaptive Test Convergent Validity

Convergent Validity Assessment for Computerized Adaptive Tests

CAT convergent validity
adaptive test construct validation
CAT validity evidence
convergent validity in CAT

Samuel Messick (validity framework); Wainer and colleagues (CAT context)

Convergent validity assessment for computerized adaptive tests (CATs) examines whether the ability or trait estimates produced by an adaptive algorithm correlate substantially with scores from other measures of the same construct. Because each examinee receives a different subset of items in a CAT, demonstrating that the resulting scores still converge with theoretically related external measures is a critical step in establishing construct validity evidence.

Validity evidence / construct validation

CAT scores, parallel fixed-form scores, external criterion measures

Wainer, H. (Ed.). (2000). Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


CAT Cronbach's Alpha

Computerized Adaptive Test Cronbach's Alpha

CAT reliability estimation
adaptive test internal consistency
CAT coefficient alpha
reliability in CAT

Adapted from Cronbach (1951); CAT reliability framing developed by Green, Bock, Humphreys, Linn & Reckase (1984)

Cronbach's alpha applied to computerized adaptive test (CAT) data estimates internal consistency reliability under the special condition that different examinees receive different subsets of items. Because the classic formula assumes every respondent answers the same items, its direct application to CAT data violates core assumptions and typically underestimates or misrepresents true reliability, requiring careful adaptation or replacement with IRT-based reliability indices.

Reliability / internal consistency estimation

Dichotomous or polytomous item responses from adaptive administration

Green, B. F., Bock, R. D., Humphreys, L. G., Linn, R. L., & Reckase, M. D. (1984). Technical guidelines for assessing computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(4), 347–360.

Weiss, D. J. (1982). Improving measurement quality and efficiency with adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6(4), 473–492.

cronbach-alpha computerized-adaptive-testing item-response-theory mcdonalds-omega test-information-function reliability-generalization


CAT-DIF

Computerized Adaptive Test Differential Item Functioning

CAT DIF analysis
adaptive test DIF
DIF in computerized adaptive testing
CAT item bias detection

Wainer, Zwick, and colleagues in the CAT and DIF literatures

CAT-DIF identifies items in a computerized adaptive test that behave differently across demographic or group subpopulations after controlling for overall ability. Because adaptive algorithms select items non-randomly based on each examinee's estimated proficiency, standard DIF detection methods require adjustment before they can be validly applied in this context.

Item response data from computerized adaptive administrations

Zwick, R., Thayer, D. T., & Mazzeo, J. (1997). Describing and categorizing DIF in polytomous items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34(4), 261–285.


Computerized adaptive test discriminant validity

Discriminant Validity in Computerized Adaptive Testing

CAT discriminant validity
adaptive test divergent validity
CAT scale differentiation
CAT construct separation

1959 (discriminant validity); CAT application from 1990s onward

Campbell & Fiske (discriminant validity framework); applied to CAT by educational measurement researchers

Discriminant validity in computerized adaptive testing (CAT) is the evaluation process confirming that a CAT-administered scale measures its intended construct distinctly from related but conceptually different constructs. Despite the adaptive item-selection mechanism varying each respondent's item set, evidence must be provided that CAT-derived scores do not overlap excessively with scores from theoretically distinct scales.

Adaptive item response data; scores from CAT and reference scales

Weiss, D. J. (2004). Computerized adaptive testing for effective and efficient measurement in counseling and education. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 37(2), 70–84.

Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.


CAT Generalizability Theory

Computerized Adaptive Test Generalizability Theory

computerized adaptive generalizability analysis

1972 (G-theory); CAT application 1990s–2000s

Lee J. Cronbach (G-theory); applied to CAT by Brennan and others

Generalizability theory (G-theory) applied to computerized adaptive testing (CAT) evaluates the dependability of adaptive test scores by decomposing score variance across measurement facets such as persons, items, and occasions. Unlike classical test theory, G-theory quantifies multiple simultaneous sources of measurement error, offering a richer reliability picture for adaptively administered assessments.

Item response data from adaptive test administrations

Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability Theory. Springer.

Van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers.


Computerized Adaptive Test Item Analysis

CAT item analysis
adaptive item calibration
IRT-based CAT item evaluation
adaptive item parameter estimation

Lord, Weiss, and colleagues in psychometric research on adaptive testing

Computerized adaptive test item analysis evaluates and calibrates items intended for use in adaptive testing environments. Unlike fixed-form analysis, it accounts for the non-random item exposure inherent in adaptive administration, using item response theory to estimate item parameters, information functions, and exposure rates across the ability continuum.

Dichotomous or polytomous item response data from adaptive sessions

van der Linden, W. J. & Glas, C. A. W. (Eds.) (2000). Computerized Adaptive Testing: Theory and Practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Embretson, S. E. & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


Computerized adaptive test item response theory

Computerized Adaptive Testing based on Item Response Theory

CAT-IRT
adaptive testing
IRT-based CAT
computerized adaptive testing

Lord, F. M.; further developed by Wainer, van der Linden, and others

Computerized adaptive testing based on item response theory is a sequential measurement procedure in which a computer algorithm selects successive test items tailored to each examinee's estimated ability level. Drawing on IRT to model item characteristics and ability estimation, CAT delivers precise scores with far fewer items than fixed-length tests, making it efficient for high-stakes assessments, clinical screening, and large-scale surveys.

Adaptive measurement / sequential testing

Dichotomous or polytomous item responses

van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (Eds.). (2010). Elements of Adaptive Testing. Springer.

item-response-theory rasch-model maximum-information-criterion three-parameter-logistic-model exploratory-factor-analysis confirmatory-factor-analysis


CAT McDonald's Omega

Computerized Adaptive Test McDonald's Omega

CAT omega reliability
omega in adaptive testing
hierarchical omega for CAT
CAT composite reliability

1999 (omega); CAT application 2000s–2010s

Roderick P. McDonald (omega); CAT-omega application extended by IRT and psychometric reliability researchers

McDonald's omega adapted for computerized adaptive testing (CAT) quantifies the reliability of ability or trait estimates when different examinees answer different subsets of items. Unlike Cronbach's alpha, omega is grounded in a factor model, making it suitable for the heterogeneous item pools and variable test lengths that characterize adaptive administrations.

Reliability coefficient for adaptive tests

Item scores from CAT administrations (polytomous or dichotomous)

McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


Computerized Adaptive Test Measurement Invariance

CAT measurement invariance
adaptive test invariance
CAT MI
measurement equivalence in CAT

Building on Meredith (1993) for invariance and Lord (1980) for adaptive testing

Computerized adaptive test measurement invariance evaluates whether a CAT instrument measures the same latent construct with the same psychometric properties across different groups (e.g., gender, language, clinical vs. community) or time points. It combines IRT-based adaptive test frameworks with measurement equivalence testing to ensure fair and comparable score interpretation.

Measurement equivalence testing in adaptive testing contexts

Item responses from CAT administrations across groups or time points

Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical Approaches to Measurement Invariance. Routledge.

Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Pilkonis, P. A., Hays, R. D., & Cella, D. (2011). Efficiency of static and computer adaptive short forms compared to full-length measures of depressive symptoms. Quality of Life Research, 20(1), 125–138.


Computerized adaptive test Rasch model

Computerized Adaptive Testing with the Rasch Model

CAT-Rasch
Rasch-based CAT
adaptive Rasch testing
computerized adaptive measurement

1960 (Rasch model); CAT integration from 1970s onward

Georg Rasch (measurement model); adaptive testing formalized by Wainer, van der Linden, and others

Computerized adaptive testing with the Rasch model selects items in real time based on each examinee's evolving ability estimate, so that every person receives a test precisely calibrated to their proficiency level. The result is a shorter, more efficient measurement instrument that loses none of the precision of a full-length fixed-form test.

Wright, B. D. & Stone, M. H. (1982). Best Test Design: Rasch Measurement. MESA Press.

rasch-model item-response-theory two-parameter-logistic-model confirmatory-factor-analysis differential-item-functioning exploratory-factor-analysis


Computerized adaptive test reliability analysis

Computerized Adaptive Test Reliability Analysis

CAT reliability
adaptive test reliability
IRT-based reliability estimation
marginal reliability in CAT

CAT reliability analysis quantifies measurement precision in computerized adaptive tests where each examinee receives a unique, individually tailored subset of items. Rather than a single classical coefficient, it uses item response theory to express precision as conditional standard error of measurement at each ability level, and marginal reliability as a global summary across the ability distribution.

Reliability estimation under adaptive testing

Polytomous or dichotomous item responses from adaptive administration

Weiss, D. J. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(4), 361–375.


CAT Scale Development

Computerized Adaptive Test Scale Development

computerized adaptive testing scale design

Frederic Lord (IRT foundations); CAT systems developed at ETS and ACT in the 1970s–1980s

Computerized adaptive test (CAT) scale development is the process of constructing, calibrating, and validating a large item bank such that the assessment algorithm can select items tailored to each examinee's estimated ability or trait level in real time. The result is a measurement instrument that achieves high precision with fewer items than a conventional fixed-form test.

Measurement design and test construction

Polytomous or dichotomous item responses, IRT-calibrated item banks

Wainer, H., Dorans, N. J., Flaugher, R., Green, B. F., Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (2000). Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


CAT Test-Retest Reliability

Computerized Adaptive Test Test-Retest Reliability

computerized adaptive testing reliability

David J. Weiss and colleagues (adaptive testing reliability literature)

Computerized adaptive test (CAT) test-retest reliability quantifies the consistency of ability estimates obtained when the same examinees complete a CAT on two separate occasions. Because adaptive algorithms tailor each examinee's item set individually, traditional reliability frameworks must be adapted to account for non-overlapping item exposures across administrations.

Latent trait scores from adaptive item administrations

Computerized adaptive testing. Wikipedia.

test-retest-reliability item-response-theory computerized-adaptive-testing intraclass-correlation-coefficient standard-error-of-measurement cronbach-alpha


Computerized Adaptive Testing

Adaptive Testing
Tailored Testing
Item-Adaptive Testing
Bilgisayar Destekli Uyarlanabilir Test

Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) is an individualized assessment methodology in which a computer algorithm selects successive test items based on a running estimate of each examinee's latent ability. Grounded in Item Response Theory, CAT dynamically tailors the item sequence so that each question is optimally informative given the current ability estimate. The framework was systematized and popularized by Howard Wainer and colleagues through the foundational primer first published in 1990 and expanded in the 2000 second edition.

Adaptive sequential test administration procedure

Output: Ability estimate (theta) with standard error

Wainer, H. (2000). Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


Concurrency Control

Database Concurrency Control and Locking Mechanisms

Concurrency control is the set of mechanisms used to coordinate concurrent transactions accessing shared data without corrupting the database. Formalized by database theorists in the 1970s-1980s, concurrency control ensures that multiple simultaneous transactions produce the same result as if they executed sequentially (serializability).

Gray, J. (1981). The transaction concept: Virtues and limitations. VLDB Endowment, 7(6), 519-539.

Reed, D. P. (1978). Naming and synchronization in a decentralized computer system. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.

Papadimitriou, C. H. (1986). The Theory of Database Concurrency Control. Computer Science Press.

transaction-management isolation-levels deadlock-detection two-phase-locking mvcc


Concurrent Case-Focused Mixed Methods

Concurrent Case-Focused Mixed Methods Design

concurrent case study mixed methods
parallel case-focused mixed design
simultaneous case mixed methods
case-embedded concurrent mixed design

2000s–2010s (formalized in Creswell & Plano Clark 2011, 2018)

Creswell & Plano Clark (mixed methods typology); Yin (case study methods)

Concurrent case-focused mixed methods is a research design in which quantitative and qualitative data are collected simultaneously — rather than in sequence — and both strands are anchored within one or more bounded cases (e.g., a school, a program, a community, or an organisation). The two data strands are analyzed separately, then merged or compared to produce a fuller, case-grounded understanding than either strand could yield alone.

Concurrent quantitative and qualitative data, both embedded within one or more bounded cases

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Sage.


Concurrent Embedded Mixed Methods Design

embedded mixed methods
nested mixed methods design
concurrent nested design
CEMM

The concurrent embedded mixed methods design collects quantitative and qualitative data at the same time, but assigns unequal priority to the two strands: one (usually quantitative) serves as the primary study, while the other (usually qualitative) is nested inside it to answer a supplementary question. The embedded strand does not stand alone; it provides a different perspective on the same phenomenon within a single unified study.

Concurrent quantitative and qualitative data; one strand nested within the other

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd ed.). Sage.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (pp. 209–240). Sage.


Concurrent Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Design

Creswell & Plano Clark (expanded typology)

Concurrent exploratory sequential mixed methods design is an advanced mixed methods configuration that combines two timing structures: a concurrent (simultaneous) data-collection phase alongside an exploratory sequential strand, in which early qualitative findings inform the development or refinement of a quantitative component. This hybrid is used when a study needs both real-time integration of qualitative and quantitative data and an instrument-building or theory-testing phase driven by initial qualitative exploration.

Qualitative and quantitative data collected concurrently alongside a sequential exploratory strand

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.


Concurrent Intervention Mixed Methods

Concurrent Intervention Mixed Methods Design

concurrent mixed methods intervention design

Creswell & Plano Clark; Tashakkori & Teddlie

Concurrent intervention mixed methods is a research design that embeds qualitative data collection within an experimental or quasi-experimental intervention study, with both data strands gathered simultaneously during the intervention period. Quantitative data assess intervention outcomes while qualitative data illuminate participants' experiences, implementation processes, or contextual factors — each strand informing the other at the integration stage.

Concurrent quantitative (experimental/intervention) and qualitative data

Murray, E. J., & Kimball, A. B. (2021). Embedding qualitative research within randomized controlled trials: lessons from the field. Trials, 22(1), 1–10.


Concurrent Mixed Methods Matrix

concurrent MM matrix
simultaneous mixed methods matrix
parallel mixed methods matrix
concurrent matrix mixed design

Teddlie & Tashakkori; Creswell & Plano Clark

The concurrent mixed methods matrix is a mixed methods design in which quantitative and qualitative data strands are collected simultaneously and organized within a structured matrix framework. The matrix maps design dimensions — such as research questions, data sources, priority, and integration points — across rows and columns, making the logical architecture of the study explicit and auditable. Both strands are analyzed independently before being merged through a matrix-guided integration step.

Concurrent quantitative and qualitative data

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage.


Concurrent Mixed Methods Meta-Inference

Concurrent Mixed Methods Meta-Inference Design

simultaneous mixed methods meta-inference

Concurrent mixed methods meta-inference is a research design in which quantitative and qualitative data strands are collected simultaneously and then subjected to a formal meta-inferential process — drawing a unified, overarching conclusion that transcends what either strand alone could produce. The concurrent timing means neither strand informs the collection of the other; instead, both strands converge at the analysis-integration stage where meta-inferences are constructed.

Simultaneously collected quantitative and qualitative data

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Sage.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (2nd ed.). Sage.


Concurrent Multilevel Mixed Methods

Concurrent Multilevel Mixed Methods Design

simultaneous multilevel mixed methods
parallel multilevel mixed methods
multilevel concurrent mixed methods
QUAN+QUAL multilevel design

John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark; Anthony Onwuegbuzie & colleagues

Concurrent multilevel mixed methods design collects quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously at two or more levels of a nested social system — for example, students within classrooms within schools — then integrates findings across those levels to produce a layered, comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon. The concurrent timing means both data strands are gathered in the same phase rather than one informing the other sequentially.

Quantitative data (surveys, tests, administrative records) and qualitative data (interviews, observations, documents) collected simultaneously across multiple levels of a system

Hitchcock, J. H., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (Eds.). (2020). The Routledge Handbook for Advancing Integration in Mixed Methods Research. Routledge.


Concurrent Multiphase Mixed Methods

Concurrent Multiphase Mixed Methods Design

concurrent-multiphase design
simultaneous multiphase MMR
parallel multiphase mixed methods
concurrent multistrand design

Concurrent multiphase mixed methods design combines the structural complexity of multiphase research — spanning several distinct project phases — with concurrent (simultaneous) data collection within each phase. At each stage, quantitative and qualitative data strands are gathered and analyzed in parallel rather than sequentially, and findings are integrated across phases to address a program of interrelated research questions over time.

Quantitative and qualitative data collected simultaneously across multiple phases

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.


Concurrent Pragmatic Mixed Methods

Concurrent Pragmatic Mixed Methods Design

concurrent pragmatic design
pragmatic concurrent mixed methods
simultaneous pragmatic mixed methods

John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark; philosophical grounding by R. Burke Johnson & Anthony Onwuegbuzie

Concurrent pragmatic mixed methods is a research design that collects quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously within a pragmatic philosophical framework. Rather than privileging either positivism or constructivism, the pragmatic stance selects methods based on what best answers the research question. Both data strands are gathered in parallel, then merged at the interpretation stage to provide a fuller picture than either strand alone could yield.

Simultaneous quantitative and qualitative data

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.


Concurrent Transformative Mixed Methods

Concurrent Transformative Mixed Methods Design

simultaneous transformative mixed methods

Donna M. Mertens; John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark

Concurrent transformative mixed methods design collects quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously, guided by a transformative theoretical lens — such as feminist, critical race, disability, or indigenous frameworks — that foregrounds equity, power, and social change. The design gives either strand equal or unequal priority, but both strands are explicitly shaped by the transformative worldview. Findings are merged or compared to generate actionable insights that advocate for marginalized communities.

Concurrent quantitative and qualitative data, often from marginalized or underrepresented groups

Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press.


Concurrent Triangulation Mixed Methods Design

Concurrent Triangulation Mixed Methods Research Design

convergent parallel design
triangulation design
QUAN+QUAL concurrent design
simultaneous triangulation

2007 (formally named in Creswell & Plano Clark, 1st ed.)

The concurrent triangulation mixed methods design collects quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously, analyzes each strand independently, and then merges the results to assess whether the two data sources corroborate one another. Often called the convergent parallel design, it is one of the foundational configurations in mixed methods research and is chosen specifically when the researcher wants to cross-validate or triangulate findings from two distinct methodological traditions.

Quantitative data (surveys, tests, instruments) and qualitative data (interviews, observations, documents) collected simultaneously

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage.


Condition Index

Condition Index (Belsley Collinearity Diagnostics)

Belsley Condition Index
Collinearity Condition Index
Singular Value Condition Index
Koşul İndeksi

The Condition Index, introduced by Belsley, Kuh, and Welsch (1980), is a scalar measure derived from singular value decomposition of the scaled regressor matrix. It quantifies the degree of near-linear dependence among predictors in ordinary least squares regression, enabling analysts to detect collinearity that inflates coefficient variance and destabilises parameter estimates. Widely used in economics, social sciences, and biomedical research wherever OLS regression is applied.

Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. John Wiley & Sons.


Conditional Logit

McFadden's Choice Model
Discrete Choice Logit
Alternative-Specific Logit
Koşullu Logit Modeli

The Conditional Logit Model, introduced by Daniel McFadden in 1974, is a discrete-choice econometric model designed to explain an individual's selection among a finite set of mutually exclusive alternatives. Unlike multinomial logit, it uses covariates that vary across alternatives — such as price, travel time, or product attributes — making it ideally suited for revealed-preference studies in transportation, marketing, and labor economics.

Discrete choice model for alternative-specific covariates

McFadden received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2000 partly for this contribution

Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA)

McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics (pp. 105–142). Academic Press.


Conditional Process Analysis

Conditional Process Analysis (Moderated Mediation)

Koşullu Süreç Analizi (Moderated Mediation)

Andrew F. Hayes (PROCESS framework); Preacher, Rucker & Hayes (moderated mediation)

Conditional process analysis is Andrew F. Hayes's regression-based PROCESS framework (2018) that combines mediation and moderation in a single model, testing how an indirect effect changes across levels of a moderator. It quantifies conditional indirect and conditional direct effects and tests them with bootstrap confidence intervals.

Regression-based conditional process model

OLS path equations with bootstrap confidence intervals

Index of moderated mediation; conditional indirect and direct effects

Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.

Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185-227.

causal-mediation iv-2sls ols-regression bayesian-sem regression-discontinuity


Conditional Geostatistical Simulation

Sequential Gaussian Simulation (Conditional Simulation)

Sequential Gaussian Simulation
SGS
Stochastic Simulation
Koşullu Simülasyon

Pierre Goovaerts; geostatistics tradition

Conditional Geostatistical Simulation — most commonly implemented as Sequential Gaussian Simulation (SGS) — generates multiple stochastic realizations of a spatial random field that are each consistent with observed sample data and with a fitted variogram model. Unlike kriging, which produces a single smoothed estimate, SGS reproduces the full spatial variability of the phenomenon. It is widely used by geoscientists, mining engineers, petroleum engineers, and environmental scientists who need to propagate spatial uncertainty through downstream models.

Output: Multiple equally probable realizations of a spatial field

Goovaerts, P. (1997). Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation. Oxford University Press.


Conditional Value-at-Risk

Conditional Value-at-Risk (Expected Shortfall)

Koşullu Riske Maruz Değer (CVaR / Expected Shortfall)

Rockafellar & Uryasev (2000); Acerbi & Tasche (2002)

Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR), also called Expected Shortfall, is a coherent tail-risk measure that quantifies the conditional expectation of losses beyond the Value-at-Risk threshold. It was introduced for optimization by Rockafellar and Uryasev (2000) and shown to be coherent by Acerbi and Tasche (2002), and it has replaced VaR as the regulatory standard under Basel III/IV.

Historical tail average / linear-programming optimization

Rockafellar, R. T. & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of Conditional Value-at-Risk. Journal of Risk, 2(3), 21-41.

Acerbi, C. & Tasche, D. (2002). On the Coherence of Expected Shortfall. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(7), 1487-1503.

value-at-risk egarch arima realized-volatility quantile-regression