| Abstract: | Process tracing is used widely in security studies to advance all kinds of arguments. When, if ever, is it capable of “resolving” anything? Does the outcome of debates hinge on “good” or “bad” process tracing? In short, does process tracing lead to superior scholarly work? How would we know? This essay considers how we can judge whether some process tracing claims are more convincing than others, drawing on the competing process tracing-based claims of alternative explanations for the end of the Cold War. It argues that for process tracing to contribute to the resolution of debates, scholars will need to agree on what constitutes a key test of their explanations. |
