Clashing Validities in the Comparative Method? Balancing In-Depth Understanding and Generalizability in Small-N Policy Studies

The comparative method receives considerable attention in political science. To some a main advantage of the method is that it allows for both in-depth insights (internal validity), and generalizability beyond the cases studied (external validity). However, others consider internal and external validity to be in conflict in this method, and claim that tradeoffs between the two are inevitable. This article addresses these contradictory arguments; and, presents a number of strategies and guidelines that may help (future) comparativists to balance the internal and external validity of their studies.