Comparative Methods

Among mammals, Carnivora presents an ideal group for investigating the complex interplay between functional adaptation and phylogenetic history. Here we explore mandibular form and its relationship to ecology and phylogeny using geometric morphometrics applied to mandibles of extant Carnivora. Both mandibular size and shape discriminate carnivoran ecological adaptations (diet, membership to small or large predatory guilds), but the interplay of morphology with phylogenetic history is profound. In general, families do not overlap in mandible shape; however, Viverridae, Herpestidae, Canidae, and Mustelidae exhibit functional and morphological convergence. Mandibular allometric trajectories are distinct among families and ecological categories. Our findings suggest that variability in mandibular form among Carnivora is primarily influenced by major evolutionary changes occurring at the family level and less, but significantly so, by ecological adaptations. Small generalist feeders (insectivores, omnivores) exhibit stronger convergence in mandibular shape than highly specialized predators; bigger taxa, such as bears, evolved unique morphologies constrained by allometric scaling. Thus, the findings of this study serve to demonstrate how ecological factors mold anatomical structures in similar ways to serve similar functions. As such, carnivoran species can be usefully grouped into functional ‘guilds’ in eco-morphological studies irrespective of their phylogenetic history.

Mandibles and teeth of ungulates have been extensively studied to discern the functional significance of their design. Grazing ungulates have deeper mandibles, longer coronoid processes, flatter incisor arcades, and more hypsodont molars in comparison to browsers. If the functional significance of both mandible and teeth shapes is well-established, it remains uncertain to what extent mandible shapes are really adapted to grazing, meaning that they evolved either to serve their current biological function or just as a structural requirement to accommodate higher crowned molars. Here, we address this question by studying the contribution of phylogeny, hypsodonty, and body size to mandibular shape variation. The mandible shape appeared to be significantly influenced by hypsodonty but not by body size. Interestingly, hypsodonty-related changes influenced the tooth row in artiodactyls and perissodactyls significantly but in the opposite directions, which is ultimately related to their different digestive strategies. Yet, we obtained a strong phylogenetic effect in perissodactyls, suggesting that their mandible shape should be strongly inherited. The strength of this effect was not significant within artiodactyls (where hypsodonty explained much more variance in mandible shape). Digestive strategy is deemed to interplay with hypsodonty to produce different paths of adaptation to particular diets in ungulates.

This paper seeks to explain democracies’ military participation in the Iraq War. Prior studies have identified institutional and partisan differences as potential explanatory factors for the observed variance. The interaction of institutions and partisanship, however, has gone largely unobserved. I argue that these factors must be analysed in conjunction: institutional constraints presume actors that fulfil their role as veto players to the executive. Likewise, partisan politics is embedded in institutional frames that enable or constrain decision-making. Hence I suggest a comparative approach that combines these factors to explain why some democracies joined the ad hoc coalition against Iraq and others did not. To investigate the interaction between institutions, partisanship and war participation I apply fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. The analysis reveals that the conjunction of right-of-centre governments with an absence of both parliamentary veto rights and constitutional restrictions was sufficient for participation in the Iraq War. In turn, for countries where the constitution requires parliamentary approval of military deployments, the distribution of preferences within the legislature proved to be decisive for military participation or non-participation.

Comparative researchers are increasingly turning to fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) as an analytic tool for social scientific inquiry. In line with its growing popularity, authors have begun to compile “good practices” of QCA usage to avoid methodological pitfalls due to insufficient attention to the underlying principles of the approach. Rather than engage this discussion on an abstract level, this paper asks what constitutes current practice in published fsQCA studies. I conduct a review of 24 recent empirical applications (2010-2013), take stock of analytical strategies across studies from diverse strands of research, and point out (best) practices on concrete examples. The review demonstrates that a range of solutions to frequently encountered problems in fsQCA research design exists. Yet, in order to utilize the full potential of QCA as a method, researchers need to reconsider its underlying assumptions – some of which seem to have fallen by the wayside in recent applications.

The transfer of one of the most classical linguistic methods of genetic comparison to languages without written traditions was made possible by the comparative approach to the languages of Africa; later on, a certain innovation became possible as well. Moreover, such an approach had to modify the strategy of research, as no historical perspective could be referred to. Difficulties (Problems) which are to be dealt with concerning empirical descriptions, and limits restricting the innovations in this field enable us to extend the discussion and open the debate on constructing the theories of language change in general. The transfer of the method thus opens opportunities to re-think (re-evaluate) more general models  of language description and development.

Comparative historical studies of the ancient religious rituals and manifestations of the Libyan-Berber populations and those of the first Canary Island populations have been carried out in depth. The studies work from the premise that both the Libyan and the Canarians populations share the same roots. However, the basic framework within which to apply a comparative methdology have barely been outlined with mere hints to the procedures, problems and potential benefits of a better undesranding of the elements to be compared. The aim of this paper is to delve into these issues in order to attempt to clarify the methodological premises for a comparative analysis of the religious manifestations of both population, highlighting the main topics of the scientific debate with respect to he comparative method itself as of the last few years. We offer new conceptual and methdological tools provided by the comparative studies of the History of Religions.