• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

In sum, case analysts should strive to develop and make use of appropriate rules for qualitative analysis. As argued in earlier chapters, however, the development of such guidelines should not be regarded as a matter of simply extending to qualitative analysis all of the standard conventions for quantitative analysis. Some of these conventions apply also to qualitative analysis, but guidelines for case studies must take into account the special characteristics of qualitative methodology.211

Conclusion

The present book was in process of publication when we became aware of a new guidebook on how to make use of primary historical sources. The author, Marc Trachtenberg, has produced a superb manuscript which is in draft form for the time being. Its title is Historical Method in the Study of International Relations.

Himself a leading diplomatic historian, Trachtenberg joined the political science department at UCLA several years ago. He has succeeded in bringing together historical and political science approaches to the study of international relations. This book will be an invaluable source for students and professors who want to integrate the perspectives of history and political science for insightful research on foreign policies.

We will not attempt to summarize the rich materials he presents. The titles of several chapters may be noted: Chapter 3, “The Critical Analysis of Historical Texts”; and Chapter 5, “Working with Documents.” A chapter is also provided on “Diplomatic History and International Relations Theory”; another chapter provides a detailed analysis of America’s road to war in 1941.

Trachtenberg’s treatment of these issues is unusually user-friendly. It is written in an engaging style. It will become standard text for research on foreign policy. Trachtenberg provides many incisive examples to illustrate his points.

We may also recall the statement that Trachtenberg made some time ago: “The basic methodological advice one can give is quite simple: documents are not necessarily to be taken at face value, and one has to see things in context to understand what they mean. One has to get into the habit of asking why a particular document was written—that is, what purpose it was meant to serve.”212

We have stressed in the preceding pages the necessity to regard archival sources as being instances of purposive communication. This advice is strongly reinforced by Deborah Larson on the basis of her experience in conducting in-depth research in archival sources in preparing her book Origins of Containment.213 A recent article by Larson helps to fill the gap regarding the proper use of archival sources, at least for research on U.S. foreign policy. In it she emphasizes that it is important to understand the purpose of a document and the events leading up to it in order to correctly interpret its meaning… . The author of a memorandum or speaker at a meeting may be trying to ingratiate himself with superiors, create a favorable impression of himself, put himself on the record in case of leaks, or persuade others to adopt his preferred policy. Whatever his goals, we cannot directly infer the communicator’s state of mind from his arguments without considering his immediate aims.214

Larson also notes that study of contemporary accounts in leading newspapers sometimes can be essential for ascertaining the context of documents. “News accounts can help to establish the atmosphere of the times, the purpose of speeches or statements, or the public reaction to a statement. Newspapers help to show what information policymakers had and provide clues as to what events they regarded as important… . In this way, newspapers help us to recapture the perspective of officials at the time.”215

Chapter 6

Phase Three: Drawing the Implications of Case Findings for Theory

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. On the inductive side of theory development, plausibility probes and