Theory-consuming or Theory-producing?: Studying Turkey as a Theory-developing Critical Case

Abstract

Case studies of Turkey are typically read and cited as narratives of the Turkish case itself, suppliers of case-specific data, or at best, applications of more general theories. They are not perceived as theory-testing, producing, or even informing exercises. While this tendency partly results from the institutional, geographical-cultural, and methodological biases of extant social sciences, scholars may also be to blame for neglecting theorydevelopment or for producing descriptive narratives. How can Turkish Studies scholars successfully contribute to general theory-development in their respective disciplines? The main value of Turkey for producing theory may lie in its rare combination of many qualities and in its temporal and regional variations. Thus, this article argues that, besides small-N and large-N comparative studies, the most promising way Turkish Studies can engage in theorybuilding may be by examining Turkey as a theory-developing critical case, i.e. as a crucial or, pathway or within-unit comparative case. For this, scholars would carefully design their studies as theory-infirming, theory-confirming, or theory-producing crucial case studies, utilize temporal and cross-sectional comparisons, and pay special attention to causal mechanisms, sequences, and processes. By using evidence from publications that draw on the Turkish case, the article shows that, since the 1990s, scholars have produced more research published in highly ranked journals of comparative politics, international relations and area studies. They also generate more single case studies with general theoretical ambitions and more visibility but so far with unclear actual theoretical impact. The article discusses some qualities of Turkey which make it a promising critical case for theory-development and how studying it this way can also help to achieve a better understanding of Turkey itself.

Turkey: The Slippery Slope from Reformist to Revolutionary Polarization and Democratic Breakdown

“…The Turkish case helps to uncover the causal mechanisms of pernicious polarization, not only because it tallies with the aforementioned causal pattern but also because it can be analyzed as a theory-disconfirming “crucial case” (Somer 2014b, 3, 7–9). Democratization failed under the AKP despite many auspicious conditions identified in extant theories of democratization (and related theories such as those involving religious actors and democratization).…”

“…Tenth, forced into a pro-status-quo position to obstruct the AKP’s polarizing-cum-transformative politics, opposition parties failed to reinvent themselves as prochange actors with new discourses, programs, and organizational forms (Somer 2007 and 2014b; Kumbaracıbaşı 2009; Ayan Musil 2014). With the opposition now including those who were non-Islamist center-right, doing so could have reestablished the electoral balance of power with the AKP, compelling the latter to act more democratically (LeBas 2011; Somer 2017).…”

Türki̇ye Temelli̇ Veri̇ Toplama Ve Küresel Uluslararasi İli̇şki̇ler Yazini

“…Her ne kadar bu çalışmalar Türkiye'deki gelişmeleri anlamak ve anlamlandırmak açısından değerli olsa da var olan teorinin Türkiye özelinde test edilmesinin ötesine geçemediği için ulaştıkları kitle daha sınırlı olmaktadır. Buna karşılık "teorik bilgi ihraç eden" çalışmalar Türkiye'ye özgü gelişmelerin teori yapıcı bir vaka olarak alınıp başka ülkelere de adapte edilebilecek şekilde uluslararası literatüre kazandırılmasını sağlayabilir (Somer, 2014). Tam da bu nedenle, Uluslararası İlişkiler alanının başat dergilerinde sıklıkla karşılaşılan "sadece Türkiye'ye odaklandığı için dergimize E. Tokdemir, E. Hatipoğlu uygun değildir" yorumuna rağmen yine aynı dergilerde tek ülkeye odaklanan birçok çalışmada görülebilmektedir.…”

Time to Quantify Turkey’s Foreign Affairs: Setting Quality Standards for a Maturing International Relations Discipline

“…A recent study shows that published articles that cover Turkey as a subject area are predominantly single case studies. Only 3 out of 627 articles published about Turkey between 1990 and 2014 in the top 40 ISI journals were large-N studies, and 164 were comparative case studies (Somer 2014). Although single case studies may have certain strengths, such as providing in-depth, intensive information about a phenomenon or tracing the processes and mechanisms between causes and observed outcomes, they are limited in establishing external validity, that is, in the extent to which their results can be generalized to other cases (George and Bennett 2005).…”