Why is analytic induction seen to be a rigorous technique of analysis?
This is a fairly complicated research methodology (see fell discussion in attached article), but is said to be rigorous because of the methodological process to get at the truth of the phenomenon. I also attached a supporting article from which this response is drawn, which expands on the information below and provides examples to consider as well.
1. Why is analytic induction seen to be a rigorous technique of analysis?
In 1934, Znaniecki coined Analytic induction was joined which was originally understood as an alternative to statistical sampling methodologies. Through analogies to methods in chemistry and physics, he touted AI as a more "scientific" approach to causal explanation than "enumerative induction" that produces probabilistic statements about ...
This solution explains why analytic induction is considered a rigorous technique of analysis in qualitative research. Supplemented with an article that describes analytic induction in detail.