|
|
Post by Two on Jun 5, 2015 21:21:58 GMT -5
I have data from two countries. Do all papers I write from that data HAVE to be explicitly comparative? My first submittd paper was rejected and one of the main critiques was that the comparative aspect was underdeveloped. But I did not mean it to be comparative in the first place. Yes there is data from two countries and yes I realize there are national differences, but that particular paper was meaning to focus on similarities across of nationality. Can I do that, or did I box myself in to having to do only comparative papers since I collected data in two places? TIA.
|
|
|
|
Post by nope on Jun 6, 2015 10:34:22 GMT -5
I did a big comparative project. I finished a comparative book from it, and one comparative article. All the other articles focused (and continue to focus) on a single country case.
But, that also means that the substance of those distinct papers is different from the comparative work. You probably need to shift the theoretical emphasis in order to make them work as single case studies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Two on Jun 7, 2015 14:37:30 GMT -5
thanks nope!
|
|
|
|
Post by Go for it on Jun 10, 2015 0:34:54 GMT -5
If your sample size is large enough for each country, go ahead and create two papers. But the comparative angle might help your likelihood of getting accepted. It offers access to more macro and governmental concepts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Two on Jun 11, 2015 23:19:53 GMT -5
Thanks go for it! I'm going to go on and make this first paper comparative (pointing out theres more similarlies than differences though) like the reviewers want, but I plan focus on just one country for the next paper.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chiming in on Jun 12, 2015 14:09:15 GMT -5
Similar to what other posters have said, it's fine methodologically to use data from two countries (assuming that you're using appropriate methods, e.g., multilevel models) without explicitly making it comparative. The issue is probably that the reviewers felt it would have been a more interesting paper had the comparative aspect been more developed, and that the reviewers were complaining that you missed an opportunity to do something more interesting. That may or may not be true, but I suppose "comparative" could also focus on the similarities as well as differences.
|
|
Method of agreement
Guest
|
Post by Method of agreement on Jun 12, 2015 23:20:36 GMT -5
Comparison doesn't need to mean different. Having data on two countries that shows the same pattern strengthens the generalizability of your argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by Two on Jun 21, 2015 21:55:28 GMT -5
thanks chiming in! yes i agree that it was mainly the reviewers thought it would be more interesting as a comparasion since i have both countries' data.
method of agreement, thanks! i agree with, and made, your point too. I pointed out the differences, but ultimately yes the similarities strengthened my claim that the association being studied was not unique to places like country one as previously thought.
|
|
