Causality in life course research: the potential use of ‘natural experiments’ for causal inference

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Longitudinal and Life Course Studies Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1332/175795919x15659210629362
Ross Macmillan, C. Hannan
{"title":"Causality in life course research: the potential use of ‘natural experiments’ for causal inference","authors":"Ross Macmillan, C. Hannan","doi":"10.1332/175795919x15659210629362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent decades have seen renewed attention to issues of causal inference in the social sciences, yet implications for life course research have not been spelled out nor is it clear what types of approaches are best suited for theoretical development on life course processes. We begin by evaluating a number of meta-theoretical perspectives, including critical realism, data mining and experimentation, and find them limited in their potential for causal claims in a life course context. From this, we initiate a discussion of the logic and practice of ‘natural experiments’ for life course research, highlighting issues of how to identify natural experiments, how to use cohort information and variation in the order and timing of life course transitions to isolate variation in exposure, how such events that alter social structures are the key to identification in causal processes of the life course and, finally, of analytic strategies for the extraction of causal conclusions from conventional statistical estimates. Through discussion of both positive and negative examples, we outline the key methodological issues in play and provide a road map of best practices. While we acknowledge that causal claims are not necessary for social explanation, our goal is to explain how causal inference can benefit life course scholarship and outline a set of practices that can complement conventional approaches in the pursuit of causal explanation in life course research.","PeriodicalId":45988,"journal":{"name":"Longitudinal and Life Course Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":"7-25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Longitudinal and Life Course Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/175795919x15659210629362","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent decades have seen renewed attention to issues of causal inference in the social sciences, yet implications for life course research have not been spelled out nor is it clear what types of approaches are best suited for theoretical development on life course processes. We begin by evaluating a number of meta-theoretical perspectives, including critical realism, data mining and experimentation, and find them limited in their potential for causal claims in a life course context. From this, we initiate a discussion of the logic and practice of ‘natural experiments’ for life course research, highlighting issues of how to identify natural experiments, how to use cohort information and variation in the order and timing of life course transitions to isolate variation in exposure, how such events that alter social structures are the key to identification in causal processes of the life course and, finally, of analytic strategies for the extraction of causal conclusions from conventional statistical estimates. Through discussion of both positive and negative examples, we outline the key methodological issues in play and provide a road map of best practices. While we acknowledge that causal claims are not necessary for social explanation, our goal is to explain how causal inference can benefit life course scholarship and outline a set of practices that can complement conventional approaches in the pursuit of causal explanation in life course research.
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
生命过程研究中的因果关系:“自然实验”在因果推理中的潜在应用
近几十年来,人们重新关注社会科学中的因果推理问题,但对生命历程研究的影响尚未得到阐明,也不清楚哪种类型的方法最适合生命历程过程的理论发展。我们首先评估一些元理论观点,包括批判现实主义、数据挖掘和实验,并发现它们在生命历程背景下因果关系主张的潜力有限。由此,我们开始讨论生命历程研究中“自然实验”的逻辑和实践,强调如何识别自然实验,如何使用队列信息和生命历程过渡顺序和时间的变化来隔离暴露的变化,这些改变社会结构的事件如何成为识别生命历程因果过程的关键,最后,从传统统计估计中提取因果结论的分析策略。通过讨论积极和消极的例子,我们概述了关键的方法问题,并提供了最佳实践的路线图。虽然我们承认因果关系不是社会解释所必需的,但我们的目标是解释因果推理如何使生命过程学术受益,并概述一套可以补充生命过程研究中追求因果解释的传统方法的实践。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
43
期刊最新文献
John Bynner obituary: to a pioneer of social research using comparative longitudinal data (28 April 1938 to 22 August 2023). Creating our legacy. Mediation of risk factors for high blood pressure in four racial and ethnic populations. Socio-economic gradients in pupils' self-efficacy: evidence, evolution and main drivers during the primary school years in France. SHARE Corona Surveys: study profile.
×
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