The authors argue that hitherto separate methodological conversations about abduction and comparison can be fruitfully brought together to generate novel, well-founded insights and retheorize an object of study in multiple-case qualitative inquiry. The authors call this abductive cross-case comparison and illustrate it by way of a collective study of how professional boundary work is changing under transnational conditions. In this study, the authors faced a common challenge in qualitative-comparative research: what to do when initial observations generate “surprises” that seem to confound the theoretical frameworks undergirding the comparison? To discuss how abductive inferences supported the authors’ response to this challenge, they explicate the acts of discovery and (re)conceptualization involved through various steps in a team-based research process. Building on the existing qualitative comparison literature, the authors suggest that such procedures fill a methodological gap and may hold great promise for overcoming obstacles in designing and implementing comparative research. Overall, the authors explicate and illustrate the method of abductive cross-case comparison, including their work as a research team. The aim of this article is thus to help sociologists implement better qualitative research that leverages a fuller potential of comparative designs to push beyond established knowledge and frameworks.

中文翻译：

---

定性研究中的溯因跨案例比较：职业变革团队合作研究的方法论教训

作者认为，迄今为止关于溯因和比较的单独方法论对话可以有效地结合在一起，产生新颖的、有根据的见解，并在多案例定性探究中重新理论化研究对象。作者称之为溯因跨案例比较，并通过对跨国条件下专业边界工作如何变化的集体研究来说明它。在这项研究中，作者在定性比较研究中面临着一个共同的挑战：当最初的观察产生“惊喜”，似乎混淆了支撑比较的理论框架时，该怎么办？为了讨论溯因推理如何支持作者应对这一挑战，他们解释了基于团队的研究过程中各个步骤所涉及的发现和（重新）概念化行为。基于现有的定性比较文献，作者认为此类程序填补了方法论空白，并可能为克服设计和实施比较研究的障碍带来巨大希望。总体而言，作者解释并说明了溯因跨案例比较的方法，包括他们作为研究团队的工作。因此，本文的目的是帮助社会学家实施更好的定性研究，充分利用比较设计的潜力来超越既定的知识和框架。