Search

This article develops a framework for the causal analysis of critical events in case study research. A critical event is defined as a contingent event that is causally important for an outcome in a specific case. Using set-theoretic analysis, this article offers definitions and measurement tools for the study of contingency and causal importance in case study research. One set of tools consists of guidelines for using theoretical expectations to arrive at conclusions about the level of contingency of events. Another set of tools are guidelines for using counterfactual cases to determine the extent to which a given event is necessary and sufficient for a particular outcome in an individual case. Examples from comparative and international studies are used to illustrate the framework.

This essay reviews the following works: Bandits and Liberals, Rebels and Saints: Latin America since Independence. By Alan Knight. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2022. Pp. xvi + 423. $35.00 [...]

There has been an emphasis on understanding the detrimental effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on individuals' wellbeing. Healthcare workers, including mental health providers, may experience increased emotional and behavioral health concerns to a greater degree than the general public. The objective of the present study was to examine the frequency and the perceived effectiveness of various coping strategies implemented by mental health practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as differences across career stages (i.e., trainees versus licensed practitioners [LPs]). Survey data were collected from mental health practitioners (N = 888) assessing the strategies they used to manage COVID-19-associated anxiety/distress and the perceived effectiveness of these strategies. Bonferroni-adjusted chi-square tests and t-tests were conducted to assess differences by career stage. Overall, respondents used various coping strategies, most commonly behavioral strategies such as distraction/engaging in an enjoyable activity (88.63%), spending time with loved ones (77.82%), and exercise (72.64%). Over one-quarter reported using alcohol to cope (28.27%). Respondents generally perceived their coping strategies as somewhat to very effective; no strategies were generally perceived as ineffective. Compared to LPs, trainees were significantly more likely to manage COVID-19-related anxiety/distress using supervision (p < .001) and substances other than alcohol or tobacco (p < .001). There were no significant differences in how effective trainees and LPs perceived each strategy. U.S. mental health practitioners' use of predominantly behavioral coping strategies, which were generally perceived as effective, during the first months of COVID-19 offers implications for interventions as the pandemic progresses., Author(s): Shannon E. Reilly [sup.1] , Zachary A. Soulliard [sup.2] , William T. McCuddy [sup.3] , James J. III Mahoney [sup.4] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.412587.d, 0000 0004 1936 9932, Department [...]