A Configurational and Thematic Method for Assessing Differentiated Associations Between Competitions and Competency in Architecture Undergraduates

This protocol aims to assess which competencies of architecture undergraduates are associated with each of the five categories of disciplinary competition and to identify the combinations of conditions under which these associations occur. Most studies examine one competition or one competency at a time, leaving no procedure for comparing categories across competencies. The protocol integrates questionnaire-assisted semi-structured interviews, fsQCA, and thematic analysis within an embedded multiple-case design. Truth tables built on institution tier, learning stage, participation frequency, and mentorship intensity are solved separately for six competency dimensions, and interview themes provide contextual explanations for the configurations. Reproducibility rests on registering hypotheses and variables before data collection, freezing the interview guide after piloting, and grading every outcome by two independent coders from event evidence rather than from self-report alone. The absence of key outcomes is modeled separately, and the solution for each outcome is classified as robust, conditional, or fragile across alternative thresholds of proportional reduction in inconsistency. Scripts are provided for each analytical step from calibration to robustness testing. Regression and structural equation models estimate the average association of each variable with an outcome. As the second aim concerns combinations of conditions, configurational analysis is used to examine whether several distinct combinations accompany comparable competency outcomes. Combining the configurational and thematic analyses provides complementary evidence for interpreting each configuration. The protocol was applied to 120 students at four Wuhan universities representing the 985 Project, 211 Project, ordinary public, and private tiers. Because each tier was represented by a single institution, tier-related configurations may partly reflect institution-specific characteristics or the competition categories concentrated there, rather than tier itself. The procedure can be adapted to urban planning, landscape architecture, industrial design, and other project-based fields by redefining the outcome dimensions according to each field's accreditation standards.