Complex Overview
In order for a specific subject to be examined, it is essential to compare it to other similar concepts and identify differences. However, based on the overall techniques that comparative research is based on, the approach is complex and facilitates a broad picture of the incidents or patterns that are being examined. According to researchers, this is useful since it implies providing global overviews, which later contribute to international interventions that are much more complex and affect various regions (Madden, 2005, p. 299).
As a result, comparative research can potentially be used to identify issues on a global level, illustrating its particular value since multiple different countries can then benefit from a cross-national intervention. This is a critical benefit since the endless possibilities in terms of the topics that can be examined refer to the practicality of the approach to analysing certain phenomena. Having a comprehensive overview of the problem implies knowing the source facilitating the issue, the area it impacts, and the extent to which the outcomes are creating otherwise absent circumstances. These concepts can all be identified and analysed through comparative research; hence it is one of the strengths of the approach.
Relationships Between Systems
Comparative research is much come complex than solely examining such concepts as countries with more significant demographics or territories. Instead, the socio-economic phenomena that impact certain people are determined in regards to their possible effects or patterns that differ depending on the subjects that are being compared (Hantrais, 1999, p. 93). The systems can be different and have various characteristics, exemplifying the practical appliance of this standard. For example, comparative research may examine everything from the level of human rights in different countries to life satisfaction among people working after retirement (Dingemans and Henkens, 2019, p. 648).
The two contrasting examples that differ based on the systems that they belong to can still apply to one research model, which suggests that comparing data is a process that can be integrated into multiple areas. Thus, comparative research is not only effective in terms of the appliance but also the determination or relation between two possibly unrelated subjects. This highlights the following argument, which is that the identification of the source of the problem is another favourable outcome correlating with the framework.
Identification of Problems
Research can be applied for determining a change, a pattern, or a correlation. However, its primary benefit is the opportunity to examine a certain problem that can then be solved through regulatory or systematic changes depending on its source. Thus, the main benefit that derives from comparative research is the possibility of identifying the challenge before minimizing it through interventions or awareness. According to researchers, bringing awareness to challenges is the first step towards their minimization through setting adequate objectives and performing activities in order for said goals to be achieved (Baistow, p. 8).
Comparative research works by identifying a contrast between two entities or phenomena, which can then be analysed in terms of the negative overviews of a particular finding. For example, a study showing that elderly patients are more likely to experience negative outcomes linked to medical errors compared to younger ones highlights the ageism and discrimination that occurs in a medical setting (Saif‐Ur‐Rahman et al., 2021, p. 418). Thus, different institutions may implement the findings in their own structural models by ensuring all patients receive the same level of care. The same principles apply when it comes to state or even international comparison research that determines the problem of a country or region through contrast. The state authorities can then look at the results, examine the contrast with another entity that successfully controls the challenge, and implement similar policies and regulations to mitigate the issues.
Combating Disinformation
There are specific problems that are less often talked about because the subjects are sensitive or someone benefits from creating a certain appearance that does not illustrate reality. According to researchers, disinformation is a major threat to the democratic system, and political discourse is one of the sources of false data that may negatively impact one’s judgment (Humprecht et al., 2020, p. 493). On the other hand, comparative research is an essential tool that can be applied to combat disinformation through factual findings. As mentioned prior, not only territories can be compared but also societies, different cultural and political systems, and ideologies (Esser and Vliegenthart, 2017, p.1).
Thus, a country with democratic values on paper can be compared with a genuinely democratic one in terms of incarcerations based on political agendas or unlawful incidents that refer to unfair voting. The results will show a genuine picture of whether the state is truly democratic or not, and such data can become important factors that motivate people to seek more rights and freedom. Any type of research can potentially reveal truthful information hence combating the lack of transparency or honestly that a corporation, organization, or authority exemplifies. However, the benefit of comparative research, in particular, is illustrating a striking difference between truth and lie, which ultimately gives individuals a better understanding due to the contrast between the two.
Reference List
Baistow, K. (no date) ‘Cross-national research: what can we learn from inter-country comparisons?’, Social Work in Europe, 7(3), pp. 8–13.
Dingemans, E. and Henkens, K. (2019) ‘Working after retirement and life satisfaction: cross-national comparative research in Europe’, Research on Aging, 41(7), pp. 648–669. Web.
Esser, F. and Vliegenthart, R. (2017) ‘Comparative research methods’, The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, pp. 1–22. Web.
Hantrais, L. (1999) ‘Contextualization in cross-national comparative research’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2(2), pp. 93–108. Web.
Humprecht, E., Esser, F. and Van Aelst, P. (2020) ‘Resilience to online disinformation: a framework for cross-national comparative research’, The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(3), pp. 493–516. Web.
Madden, C. (2005) ‘Cross-country comparisons of cultural statistics: issues and good practice’, Cultural Trends, 14(4), pp. 299–316. Web.
Saif‐Ur‐Rahman, K. M., Mamun, R., Eriksson, E., He, Y. and Hirakawa, Y. (2021) ‘Discrimination against the elderly in health‐care services: a systematic review,’ Psychogeriatrics, 21(3), pp. 418–429. Web.