Process Tracing vs. "process tracing"

I would like to take a moment to clear up what seems to be a common confusion in qualitative research.  The past decade or so has seen an explosion in qualitative research -- and particularly research associated with the Process Tracing techniques championed by George, Bennett, and others.  I would like to take a moment to explain the (considerable) merits of Process Tracing and to distinguish it from "process tracing."

Process Tracing involves the elaboration of a casual mechanism from a theory to identify various points where a theory can be potentially falsified.  Each step in the causal process provides an opportunity for falsification.  Typically, Process Tracing then involves the historical investigation of very specific points in time that can serve to test the original theory.

Notice that Process Tracing requires a strong, detailed theory.  Most of all, you must have a theory that makes detailed predictions about casual processes. You have to set out the specific potentially falsifying moments in the sequence of causal mechanisms as well as the potential evidence for falsification.  Such evidence may be textual accounts of behavior -- the actual type of data is less central to the Process Tracing technique than the elaboration of a causal mechanism.

In the end, your Process Tracing strategy must say "the theory would predict X to happen at historical moment T -- evidence that Y happened instead would constitute contrary evidence."  Of course, not every falsification would necessitate throwing out the entire theory.  However, the theory and the historical test need to be clear enough to draw the theory into question if Y happened instead of (theory predicted) X.

Unfortunately, this powerful tool of investigation has been competing for attention with a seemingly recent innovation -- "process tracing."  As you can tell, one inconvenience is that this new competitor uses the name of Process Tracing and seeks to borrow its legitimacy as a research strategy.  However "process tracing"  seems to be a different beast entirely.  "process tracing" involves maybe (maybe not) presenting the name of a theory and then providing a chronological account of events that occasionally mention terms similar to the name of the theory.  There are no specific predictions to potentially falsify the theory.  Often specific events fade into the background as general themes dominate attention.  "process tracing" is not a theory testing exercise but (at best) a theory motivated narrative of events.

Please do not confuse Process Tracing with "process tracing."

Next up -- replication and reproducibility of public management research...