An Exploration of the Presence of Positive-Results Bias in Qualitative Comparative Analysis

The value of negative results for knowledge advancement stands in contrast to the abundance of positive findings found in quantitative research across research fields. There is reason to believe that positive-results bias is also present in studies that use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). This possibility has been neglected so far in work on QCA. This article contributes to the field of meta science and QCA by exploring whether hypothesis-testing QCA articles collectively indicate the presence of positive-results bias. An analysis of consistency scores and comparison of hypotheses and findings reported in QCA articles and PhD theses indicate the presence of biases. The results suggest two implications. First, the interpretation fo findings in a field should take into account that negative results may be underreported. Second, QCA research would benefit from exploring techniques that could be integrated into the research and peer-review process to address positive-results bias.

• Publication year

  2025

• Venue

  Sociological Methods & Research

• Publication date

  2025-09-01

• Fields of study

  Not labeled

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1177/00491241251357948
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Unpacking P-Hacking and Publication Bias

  2023cited by this paper
• Building bonds: A pre-registered secondary data analysis examining linear and curvilinear relations between socio-economic status and communal attitudes

  2022cited by this paper
• Advances in transparency and reproducibility in the social sciences.

  2022cited by this paper
• Designing Research With Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA): Approaches, Challenges, and Tools

  2020cited by this paper
• An Excess of Positive Results: Comparing the Standard Psychology Literature With Registered Reports

  2020cited by this paper
• The past, present and future of Registered Reports

  2020cited by this paper
• Set-Analytic Approaches, Especially Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)

  2019cited by this paper
• Transparent and Reproducible Social Science Research

  2019cited by this paper
• Improving transparency in observational social science research: A pre-analysis plan approach

  2018cited by this paper
• The preregistration revolution

  2018cited by this paper
• Why Too Many Political Science Findings Cannot Be Trusted and What We Can Do About It: A Review of Meta-Scientific Research and a Call for Academic Reform

  2018cited by this paper
• Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer

  2014cited by this paper
• Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries

  2011cited by this paper
• Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data

  2010cited by this paper
• Publication Bias in Empirical Sociological Research

  2008cited by this paper
• Redesigning social inquiry

  2008cited by this paper
• Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage

  2006cited by this paper
• Publication decisions revisited: the effect of the outcome of statistical tests on the decision to p

  1995cited by this paper
• The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results

  1979cited by this paper
• Publication Decisions and their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Tests of Significance—or Vice Versa

  1959cited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.