Did Franklin Delano Roosevelt escalate confliict with Japan and Germany before Pearl Harbor, or did he attempt to avoid war? To what extent did U.S. public opinion influence these decisions? And, crucially, how do we know? Scholars offer diametrically opposed analyses of this historical case, bearing directly on international relations theories regarding the effects of democracy on war and foreign policy. In this debate and the broader security studies field, scholars increasingly employ published and archival primary sources. Because researchers lack a clear template for descriptive and causal inference with documentary evidence, though, such work is indeterminate and ultimately unpersuasive. How can political scientists approach archives and primary documents more effectively and efficiently? Above all, case studies need stronger research designs and clearer source selection strategies, not just more authoritative documents. A critical review of the sources cited in recent scholarship in the debate leading to the United States' entry into World War II, and a replication analysis of a key portion of the documentary record, underscores this need for improved research design and buttresses eight guidelines for the selection and analysis of textual evidence in case study research.

中文翻译：

---

档案与推论：案例研究中的文献证据和美国加入二战的辩论

富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福是在珍珠港事件之前升级了与日本和德国的冲突，还是试图避免战争？美国舆论在多大程度上影响了这些决定？而且，至关重要的是，我们如何知道？学者们对这一历史案例进行了截然相反的分析，直接影响了关于民主对战争和外交政策影响的国际关系理论。在这场辩论和更广泛的安全研究领域中，学者们越来越多地使用已发表和存档的原始资料。然而，由于研究人员缺乏一个清晰的模板来进行描述性和因果推理以及书面证据，因此此类工作是不确定的，最终没有说服力。政治科学家如何更有效地处理档案和原始文件？首先，案例研究需要更强大的研究设计和更清晰的来源选择策略，而不仅仅是更权威的文件。对最近学术界在导致美国加入第二次世界大战的辩论中引用的资料来源进行批判性审查，并对文献记录的关键部分进行复制分析，强调了改进研究设计的必要性，并支持了八项指导方针案例研究中文本证据的选择和分析。