Already have a working QCA::truthTable() / minimize() analysis? Pick a sweep type, fill in the same variables and thresholds you already use, and copy out the equivalent ThSQCA call.
1Sweep type
2Data & variables
3Condition thresholds
Most conditions are on their raw scale and get dichotomized at a
threshold. If one is already calibrated to fuzzy-set membership
scores in [0, 1], check fuzzy 0–1 for it — it
is then passed straight through (via pre_calibrated)
with no threshold, and won't be offered as a variable to sweep.
4Analysis settings
5Directional expectations dir.exp, one per condition
For each condition: does its presence/high level (Favors outcome) or its absence/low level (Disfavors outcome) help produce the outcome, or is there No expectation either way? This is exactly what turns the parsimonious solution into the intermediate solution — the type most QCA guides (Ragin 2008; Schneider & Wagemann 2012) recommend reporting.
Why trust the numbers: every sweep function delegates truth-table
construction and Boolean minimization to QCA::truthTable()
and QCA::minimize() unchanged. ThSQCA only loops,
collects, and reports — it does not reimplement the computation, so
results match a direct QCA run at every cell.