Just How Much of History Is Countable?

IF 0.8 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Science Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1093/psquar/qqad117
Daniel Carpenter
{"title":"Just How Much of History Is Countable?","authors":"Daniel Carpenter","doi":"10.1093/psquar/qqad117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How can historical perspective be brought to the quantitative social sciences? The question has proven immensely popular, but answers that deal squarely with historical context and narrative remain elusive. An important recent book by Gregory Wawro and Ira Katznelson—Time Counts—provides an important new direction and a kit of useable tools. Using Wawro and Katznelson's approach and methods puts social scientists in a better position to appreciate the historicity of their data and to avoid common errors in statistical execution and inference. Time Counts also raises questions every bit as vital as those it answers, especially when it comes to the boundaries between narrative and quantitative work. An important concern is that inference from a particular historical setting (or what I call a “regime”) cannot be reduced to a special case of inference from large-sample statistics. Historical judgment is at least partially incommensurable with the idea of probability, cases are often important precisely because they are not countable, and scientific rigor may demand avoiding quantification for part of the social scientist's approach.","PeriodicalId":51491,"journal":{"name":"Political Science Quarterly","volume":"186 Erratum","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Science Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/psquar/qqad117","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract How can historical perspective be brought to the quantitative social sciences? The question has proven immensely popular, but answers that deal squarely with historical context and narrative remain elusive. An important recent book by Gregory Wawro and Ira Katznelson—Time Counts—provides an important new direction and a kit of useable tools. Using Wawro and Katznelson's approach and methods puts social scientists in a better position to appreciate the historicity of their data and to avoid common errors in statistical execution and inference. Time Counts also raises questions every bit as vital as those it answers, especially when it comes to the boundaries between narrative and quantitative work. An important concern is that inference from a particular historical setting (or what I call a “regime”) cannot be reduced to a special case of inference from large-sample statistics. Historical judgment is at least partially incommensurable with the idea of probability, cases are often important precisely because they are not countable, and scientific rigor may demand avoiding quantification for part of the social scientist's approach.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
历史有多少是可数的?
如何将历史视角引入定量社会科学?事实证明,这个问题非常受欢迎,但直接处理历史背景和叙事的答案仍然难以捉摸。最近由Gregory Wawro和Ira katznelson合著的一本重要的书——《时间计数》——提供了一个重要的新方向和一套可用的工具。使用Wawro和Katznelson的方法和方法使社会科学家能够更好地理解他们数据的历史性,并避免统计执行和推断中的常见错误。《Time Counts》也提出了一些与它所回答的问题同样重要的问题,特别是当涉及到叙述和定量工作之间的界限时。一个重要的问题是,从一个特定的历史背景(或者我称之为“制度”)得出的推论不能简化为从大样本统计得出的推论的特殊情况。历史判断至少在一定程度上与概率的概念是不可通约的,案例往往是重要的,正是因为它们是不可计数的,科学的严谨性可能要求避免量化作为社会科学家方法的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Political Science Quarterly
Political Science Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Published continuously since 1886, Political Science Quarterly or PSQ is the most widely read and accessible scholarly journal covering government, politics and policy. A nonpartisan journal, PSQ is edited for both political scientists and general readers with a keen interest in public and foreign affairs. Each article is based on objective evidence and is fully refereed.
期刊最新文献
The Governance Cycle in Parliamentary Democracies: A Computational Social Science Approach by Scott de Marchi and Michael Laver The World Is Our Stage: The Global Rhetorical Presidency and the Cold War by Allison M. Prasch No Blank Check: The Origins and Consequences of Public Antipathy Towards Presidential Power by Andrew Reeves and Jon C. Rogowski The Pursuit of Dominance: 2000 Years of Superpower Grand Strategy by Christopher J. Fettweis Prestige, Manipulation, and Coercion: Elite Power Struggles in the Soviet Union and China after Stalin and Mao by Joseph Torigian
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1