| Popis: |
This chapter explains some subtleties of how all-else-equal claims work, showing how these types of claims fit together to achieve commensurability. It emphasizes the different obligations the all-else-equal caveat places on theorists and empiricists. It also points out that the analysis of all-else-equal claims in theory and empirics suggests that the tools of the credibility revolution have broader applicability than is often appreciated, which are essential for assessing any all-else-equal claim, whether or not it has a causal interpretation. The chapter discusses the formal theory and credible research designs that are natural complements because their shared attention to all-else-equal conditions strengthens commensurability. It highlights important differences in how all-else-equal claims arise in theoretical and empirical work and how a thorough treatment of commensurability requires sensitivity to differences. |
