Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research

Abstract

This chapter highlights the particular advantages of comparative international approaches for media policy research. It starts by explaining the basic logic and main objectives of comparative analysis. Further sections of the chapter are devoted to different design types and related methodological procedures. Finally, special attention is given to the question of how to avoid various types of cultural bias. All these points are illustrated by the concrete example of a comparative international study on media (self-) regulation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Downey, J., & Stanyer, J. (2010). Comparative media analysis: Why some fuzzy thinking might help. Applying fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis to the personalization of mediated political communication. European Journal of Communication, 25(4), 331–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberwein, T., Fengler, S., Lauk, E., & Leppik-Bork, T. (Eds.). (2011). Mapping media accountability—In Europe and beyond. Cologne: Herbert von Halem Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esser, F. (2014). Methodological challenges in comparative communication research: Advancing cross-national research in times of globalization. In M. J. Canel & K. Voltmer (Eds.), Comparing political communication across time and space (pp. 17–33). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (Eds.). (2012a). Handbook of comparative communication research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (2012b). On the why and how of comparative inquiry in communication studies. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), Handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 3–22). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fengler, S., Eberwein, T., Mazzoleni, G., Porlezza, C., & Russ-Mohl, S. (Eds.). (2014). Journalists and media accountability: An international study of news people in the digital age. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurevitch, M., & Blumler, J. G. (1990). Comparative research: The extending frontier. In D. L. Swanson & D. Nimmo (Eds.), New directions in political communication (pp. 305–328). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, P. (2012). A political scientist’s contribution to the comparative study of media systems in Europe: A response to Hallin and Mancini. In N. Just & M. Puppis (Eds.), Trends in communication policy research: New theories, new methods, new subjects (pp. 141–158). Bristol: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman, T. (2008). Issues and methods in comparative politics (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S. (2003). On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 477–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S. (1843). A system of logic. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puppis, M., & d’Haenens, L. (2012). Comparing media policy and regulation. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), Handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 221–233).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragin, C. C. (2008). Qualitative comparative analysis using fuzzy sets (fsQCA). In B. Rihoux & C. C. Ragin (Eds.), Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis and related techniques (pp. 87–122). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rihoux, B. (2006). Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related systematic comparative methods: Recent advances and remaining challenges for social science research. International Sociology, 21(5), 679–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roessler, P. (2012). Comparative content analysis. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), Handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 459–468). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, G. (1994). Compare why and how? In M. Dogan & A. Kazancigil (Eds.), Comparing nations: Concepts, strategies, substance (pp. 14–34). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (2016). A media sociology for the networked public sphere: The hierarchy of influences model. Mass Communication and Society, 19, 389–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis of comparative research. In J. W. Berry, Y. P. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 257–300). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhulst, S. G., & Price, M. E. (2008). Comparative media law research and its impact on policy. International Journal of Communication, 2, 406–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vliegenthart, R. (2012). Advanced strategies for data analysis: Opportunities and challenges of comparative data. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), Handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 486–500). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, W., & Kolb, S. (2004). Designs and methods of comparative political communication research. In F. Esser & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Comparing political communication: Theories, cases, and challenges (pp. 87–111). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, W., & Kolb, S. (2012). Securing equivalence: Problems and solutions. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 469–485). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Further Reading

  • d’Haenens, L., Sousa, H., & Trappel, J. (Eds.). (2018). Comparative media policy, regulation and governance in Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of comparative communication research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman, T. (2008). Issues and methods in comparative politics (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Frank Esser

Authors
  1. Frank Esser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication, Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA

    Hilde Van den Bulck

  2. Department of Communication and Media Research, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Manuel Puppis

  3. Department of Communication Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Karen Donders

  4. Department of Communication Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Leo Van Audenhove

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Esser, F. (2019). Comparative Research. In: Van den Bulck, H., Puppis, M., Donders, K., Van Audenhove, L. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16065-4_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation