Skip to main content

Theoretical Sampling and Qualitative Empirical Model Validation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Social Simulation

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Complexity ((SPCOM))

  • 640 Accesses

Abstract

Systems dynamics models of social processes generally have a formal core of quantitative equations. The temporal dynamics of their output may however be categorized according to qualitative typologies: depending on the model parameters, output variables may fluctuate, steadily increase or decrease, etc. Hence the present paper suggests to explore by computer simulation the relation between parameter values and the associated type of model dynamics. The result may be mapped in a multi-dimensional parameter space. Such maps of model dynamics are useful tools for systematic empirical tests, which are often more rigorous and complete than the usual checks with particular data sets. Like in theoretical sampling in the tradition of qualitative social studies, they guide the investigator to empirical observations, which are of special interest for model validation. Thus, if the mentioned observations and the related qualitative model predictions systematically coincide, the tested model has a high degree of empirical validity. The use of quantitative computer models as pilots through the space of qualitative social dynamics is illustrated by a simulation model of the mobilization for political protest. Depending on the contagiousness of the conflict and the levels of frustration and repression, the model has three possible qualitative outcomes regarding the dynamics of protest mobilization: extinction, stable positive equilibria, and regular/irregular oscillations. The analysis of the model by computer simulation allows to construct samples of particular parameter configurations, which lead to the mentioned mobilization dynamics and thus may serve for empirical model validation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For reasons of simplicity, the frontiers between model behavior A and B are in Figs. 1, 2 and 3 linear. However, in reality these frontiers are often curved.

  2. 2.

    ≈ is the symbol for proportionality between the left- and the right-hand side of Eq. (1). In the simulations of Figs. 4, 5, 6 and 7 we assume that this proportionality ≈ is just the equality = .

  3. 3.

    If according to Eq. (1) the next following share of mobilized people \(\Delta\)M + M is negative, \(\Delta\)M is adjusted such that \(\Delta\)M = −M.

  4. 4.

    For illustrative purposes the author uses simulation for exploring the behavior of the model, although in the present case analytical solutions are available.

  5. 5.

    If there are doubts about the validity of the interpolated model behavior, it may be recalculated for the observed real case.

References

  1. Lorscheid, I., et al.: Opening the “black box” of simulations: increased transparency and effective communication through the systematic design of experiments. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 18, 22–62 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Law, A.M.: Simulation Modeling and Analysis, chap. 12, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Glaser, B., Strauss, A.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, chap. 3. Aldine Publishing, Chicago (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research, chap. 13, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Neumann, M.: Grounded simulation. JASSS 18(1), 9 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Arnold, E.: Validation of computer simulations from a Kuhnian perspective. In: Beisbart, C., Saam, N.J. (Eds.) Computer Simulation Validation, chap. 8. Springer, Cham (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Troitzsch, K.: Using empirical data for designing, calibrating and validating simulation models. In: Jager, W., et al. (Eds.) Advances in Social Simulation 2015, pp. 413–427. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Waldherr, A., Wijermans, N.: Communicating social simulation models to sceptical minds. JASSS 16(4), 13 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Everitt, B.S.: The Cambridge Dictionary of Statistics, 3rd edn, pp. 119–120. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Robinson, A.P.: Testing simulation models using frequentist statistics. In: Beisbart, C., Saam, N.J. (Eds.) Computer Simulation Validation, chap. 19. Springer, Cham (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Murray-Smith, D.J.: Verification and validation principles from a systems perspective. In: Beisbart, C., Saam, N.J. (Eds.) Computer Simulation Validation, chap. 4. Springer, Cham (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Patton, M.Q.: Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, pp. 270, 309, 4th edn. Sage, Los Angeles (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mueller, G.P.: Getting order out of chaos: a mathematical model of political conflict. Russ. Sociol. Rev. 16(4), 37–52 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dixon, R.: The logistic family of discrete dynamic models. In: Creedy, J., Vance, M. (Eds.) Chaos and Non-linear Models in Economics, chap. 4. Edward Elgar, Aldershot (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Creedy, J., Martin, V.: The strange attraction of chaos in economics. In: Creedy, J., Vance, M. (Eds.) Chaos and Non-linear Models in Economics, chap. 2. Edward Elgar, Aldershot (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Taylor, Ch., Jodice, D.: World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators, vol. 2, tab. 2.1, 3rd edn. Yale University Press, New Haven (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Freedom House: Freedom in the World. Washington DC (2020). https://freedomhouse.org/reports

  18. OECD: Better Life Index, edition 2017. Paris, OECD Publications (2017). https://stats.oecd.org/index.Aspx?DataSetCode=BLI2017 (col.“life satisfacttion”)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Mueller, G.P. (2022). Theoretical Sampling and Qualitative Empirical Model Validation. In: Czupryna, M., Kamiński, B. (eds) Advances in Social Simulation. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92843-8_27

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics