Comparative historical research

Last updated

Comparative historical research is a method of social science that examines historical events in order to create explanations that are valid beyond a particular time and place, either by direct comparison to other historical events, theory building, or reference to the present day. [1] [2] Generally, it involves comparisons of social processes across times and places. It overlaps with historical sociology. While the disciplines of history and sociology have always been connected, they have connected in different ways at different times. This form of research may use any of several theoretical orientations. It is distinguished by the types of questions it asks, not the theoretical framework it employs.

Contents

Major researchers

Some commentators have identified three waves of historical comparative research. [3] The first wave of historical comparative research concerned how societies came to be modern, i.e. based on individual and rational action, with exact definitions varying widely. Some of the major researchers in this mode were Alexis de Tocqueville, [4] Karl Marx, [5] Emile Durkheim, [6] Max Weber, [7] and W.E.B. Du Bois. [8] The second wave reacted to a perceived ahistorical body of theory and sought to show how social systems were not static, but developed over time. [9] Notable authors of this wave include Reinhard Bendix, [10] Barrington Moore, Jr., [11] Stein Rokkan, Theda Skocpol, [12] Charles Tilly, [13] Michael Mann, [14] and Mark Gould. [15] Some have placed the Annales school and Pierre Bourdieu in this general group, despite their stylistic differences. [16] The current wave of historical comparative research sociology is often but not exclusively post-structural in its theoretical orientation. Influential current authors include Julia Adams, [17] Ann Laura Stoler, [18] Philip Gorski, [19] and James Mahoney. [20]

Methods

There are four major methods that researchers use to collect historical data. These are archival data, secondary sources, running records, and recollections. The archival data, or primary sources, are typically the resources that researchers rely most heavily on. Archival data includes official documents and other items that would be found in archives, museums, etc. Secondary sources are the works of other historians who have written history. Running records are ongoing series of statistical or other sorts of data, such as census data, ship's registries, property deeds, etc. Finally recollections include sources such as autobiographies, memoirs or diaries. [21]

There are four stages, as discussed by Schutt, to systematic qualitative comparative historical studies: (1) develop the premise of the investigation, identifying events, concepts, etc., that may explain the phenomena; (2) choose the case(s) (location- nation, region) to examine; (3) use what Theda Skocpol has termed as "interpretive historical sociology" and examine the similarities and the differences; and (4) based on the information gathered, propose a causal explanation for the phenomena. [22]

The key issues in methods for historical comparative research stem from the incomplete nature of historical data, the complexity and scale of the social systems, and the nature of the questions asked. Historical data is a difficult set of data to work with due to multiple factors. This data set can be very biased, such as diaries, memoirs, letters, which are all influenced not only by the person writing them, that person's world view but can also, logically, be linked to that individual's socioeconomic status. In this way the data can be corrupt/skewed. Historical data regardless or whether it may or may not be biased (diaries vs. official documents) is also vulnerable to time. Time can destroy fragile paper, fade ink until it is illegible, wars, environmental disasters can all destroy data and special interest groups can destroy mass amounts of data to serve a specific purpose at the time they lived, etc. Hence, data is naturally incomplete and can lead social scientists to many barriers in their research. Often historical comparative research is a broad and wide reaching topic such as how democracy evolved in three specific regions. Tracking how democracy developed is a daunting task for one country or region let alone three. Here the scale of the social system, which is attempting to be studied, is overwhelming but also the complexity is extreme. Within each case there are multiple different social systems that can affect the development of a society and its political system. The factors must be separated and analyzed so that causality can be attained. It is causality that brings us to yet another key issue in methods for historical comparative research, the nature of the questions which are asked is attempting to propose causal relationships between a set of variables. Determining causality alone is a difficult task; coupled with the incomplete nature of historical data and the complexity and scale of the social systems being used to examine causality the task becomes even more challenging.

Theda Skocpol and Margaret Somers argued that there were three types of comparative history research: [23] [24]

A lot of comparative historical research uses inductive iteration (as opposed to purely deductive methods) whereby scholars assess the data first and reformulate internally valid explanations to account for the data. [25]

Identifying features

The three identifying issues of historical comparative research are causal relationships, processes over time, and comparisons. [22] As mentioned above causal relationships are difficult to support although we make causal assumptions daily. Schutt discusses the five criteria, which must be met in order to have a causal relationship. Of the five the first three are the most important: association, time order and nonspuriousness. Association simply means that between two variables; the change in one variable is related to the change in another variable. Time order refers to the fact that the cause (the independent variable) must be shown to have occurred first and the effect (the dependent variable) to have occurred second. Nonspuriousness says that the association between two variables is not because of a third variable. The final two criteria are; identifying a causal mechanism- how the connection/association among variables is thought to have occurred- and the context in which this association occurs. The deterministic causal approach requires that in every study, the independent and dependent variable have an association, and within that study every case (nation, region) the independent variable has an effect on the dependent variable. [22]

John Stuart Mill devised five methods for systematically analyzing observations and making more accurate assumptions about causality. Mill's Methods discusses; direct method of agreement, method of difference, joint method of agreement and difference, method of residues and method of concomitant variations. Mill's methods are typically the most useful when the causal relationship is already suspected and can therefore be a tool for eliminating other explanations. [26] Some methodologists contend Mill's methods cannot provide proof that the variation in one variable was caused by the variation of another variable.

Difficulties

There are several difficulties that historical comparative research faces. James Mahoney, one of the current leading figures in historical comparative research, identifies several of these in his book "Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences." Mahoney highlights key issues such as how micro level studies can be incorporated into the macro level field of historical comparative research, issues ripe for historical comparative research that continue to remain overlooked, such as law, and the issue of whether historical comparative research should be approached as a science or approached as a history. [27] This is one of the more prevalent debates today, often debated between Theda Skocpol, who sides with the historical approach, and Kiser and Hechter, who are proponents of the scientific view that should search for general causal principles. Both Kiser and Hechter employ models within Rational Choice Theory for their general causal principles. Historical researchers that oppose them (Skocpol, Summers, others) argue that Kiser and Hechter do not suggest many other plausible general theories, and thus it seems as though their advocacy for general theories is actually advocacy for their preferred general theory. They also raise other criticisms of using rational choice theory in historical comparative research. [28]

Role of general theory

In recent decades historical comparative researchers have debated the proper role of general theory. Two of the main players in this debate have been Edgar Kiser and Michael Hechter. They have argued that it is important to use a general theory in order to be able to test the results of the research that has been conducted. They do not argue that one specific theory is better than the other just that a theory needs to be used. Their chosen theory is rational choice. One of the main problems is that everyone has a different concept of what a theory is and what makes something a theory. Some of their opponents feel that any theory can be tested and they are arguing that some cannot be. Kiser and Hecter do acknowledge that this is a growing field and that their perspective may change in the future.

The comparative-historical method can be seen in The Familial State: Ruling Families and Merchant Capitalism in Early Modern Europe. Researcher Julia Adams draws on both original archival work and secondary sources to analyze how merchant families contested with noble families for influence in the early modern Dutch Republic. [29] She argues that those contests produced the political institutions that became the modern Dutch state, by frequently making reference to England and France. Her use of feminist theory to account for elements of the Dutch Republic, such as patriarchal kinship structures in the ruling families, expanded on earlier theories of how modern states came to be. This is an illustration of how comparative-historical analysis uses cases and theories together.

See also

Related Research Articles

Econometrics is an application of statistical methods to economic data in order to give empirical content to economic relationships. More precisely, it is "the quantitative analysis of actual economic phenomena based on the concurrent development of theory and observation, related by appropriate methods of inference". An introductory economics textbook describes econometrics as allowing economists "to sift through mountains of data to extract simple relationships". Jan Tinbergen is one of the two founding fathers of econometrics. The other, Ragnar Frisch, also coined the term in the sense in which it is used today.

Causality (also called causation, or cause and effect) is influence by which one event, process, state, or object (acause) contributes to the production of another event, process, state, or object (an effect) where the cause is partly responsible for the effect, and the effect is partly dependent on the cause. In general, a process has many causes, which are also said to be causal factors for it, and all lie in its past. An effect can in turn be a cause of, or causal factor for, many other effects, which all lie in its future. Some writers have held that causality is metaphysically prior to notions of time and space.

A case study is an in-depth, detailed examination of a particular case within a real-world context. For example, case studies in medicine may focus on an individual patient or ailment; case studies in business might cover a particular firm's strategy or a broader market; similarly, case studies in politics can range from a narrow happening over time like the operations of a specific political campaign, to an enormous undertaking like, world war, or more often the policy analysis of real-world problems affecting multiple stakeholders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social research</span> Research conducted by social scientists

Social research is a research conducted by social scientists following a systematic plan. Social research methodologies can be classified as quantitative and qualitative.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quantitative research</span> All procedures for the numerical representation of empirical facts

Quantitative research is a research strategy that focuses on quantifying the collection and analysis of data. It is formed from a deductive approach where emphasis is placed on the testing of theory, shaped by empiricist and positivist philosophies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comparative politics</span> Field in political science

Comparative politics is a field in political science characterized either by the use of the comparative method or other empirical methods to explore politics both within and between countries. Substantively, this can include questions relating to political institutions, political behavior, conflict, and the causes and consequences of economic development. When applied to specific fields of study, comparative politics may be referred to by other names, such as comparative government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barrington Moore Jr.</span> American sociologist (1913–2005)

Barrington Moore Jr. was an American political sociologist, and the son of forester Barrington Moore.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theda Skocpol</span> American sociologist and political scientist (born 1947)

Theda Skocpol is an American sociologist and political scientist, who is currently the Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology at Harvard University. She is best known as an advocate of the historical-institutional and comparative approaches, as well as her "state autonomy theory". She has written widely for both popular and academic audiences. She has been President of the American Political Science Association and the Social Science History Association.

<i>States and Social Revolutions</i> 1979 book by Theda Skocpol

States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia and China is a 1979 book by Theda Skocpol, published by Cambridge University Press, that examines the causes of social revolutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sociological theory</span> Theory advanced by social scientists to explain facts about the social world

A sociological theory is a supposition that intends to consider, analyze, and/or explain objects of social reality from a sociological perspective, drawing connections between individual concepts in order to organize and substantiate sociological knowledge. Hence, such knowledge is composed of complex theoretical frameworks and methodology.

Historical institutionalism (HI) is a new institutionalist social science approach that emphasizes how timing, sequences and path dependence affect institutions, and shape social, political, economic behavior and change. Unlike functionalist theories and some rational choice approaches, historical institutionalism tends to emphasize that many outcomes are possible, small events and flukes can have large consequences, actions are hard to reverse once they take place, and that outcomes may be inefficient. A critical juncture may set in motion events that are hard to reverse, because of issues related to path dependency. Historical institutionalists tend to focus on history to understand why specific events happen.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Historical sociology</span> Interdisciplinary field of research

Historical sociology is an interdisciplinary field of research that combines sociological and historical methods to understand the past, how societies have developed over time, and the impact this has on the present. It emphasises a mutual line of inquiry of the past and present to understand how discrete historical events fit into wider societal progress and ongoing dilemmas through complementary comparative analysis.

Quantitative methods provide the primary research methods for studying the distribution and causes of crime. Quantitative methods provide numerous ways to obtain data that are useful to many aspects of society. The use of quantitative methods such as survey research, field research, and evaluation research as well as others. The data can, and is often, used by criminologists and other social scientists in making causal statements about variables being researched.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Causation (sociology)</span> Belief that events occur in predictable ways and that one event leads to another

Causation refers to the existence of "cause and effect" relationships between multiple variables. Causation presumes that variables, which act in a predictable manner, can produce change in related variables and that this relationship can be deduced through direct and repeated observation. Theories of causation underpin social research as it aims to deduce causal relationships between structural phenomena and individuals and explain these relationships through the application and development of theory. Due to divergence amongst theoretical and methodological approaches, different theories, namely functionalism, all maintain varying conceptions on the nature of causality and causal relationships. Similarly, a multiplicity of causes have led to the distinction between necessary and sufficient causes.

Process tracing is a research method used to develop and test theories. It is generally understood as a "within-case" method to draw inferences on the basis of causal mechanisms. It has been used in social sciences, as well as in natural sciences.

Causal inference is the process of determining the independent, actual effect of a particular phenomenon that is a component of a larger system. The main difference between causal inference and inference of association is that causal inference analyzes the response of an effect variable when a cause of the effect variable is changed. The science of why things occur is called etiology, and can be described using the language of scientific causal notation. Causal inference is said to provide the evidence of causality theorized by causal reasoning.

Social revolutions are sudden changes in the structure and nature of society. These revolutions are usually recognized as having transformed society, economy, culture, philosophy, and technology along with but more than just the political systems.

Causal analysis is the field of experimental design and statistics pertaining to establishing cause and effect. Exploratory causal analysis (ECA), also known as data causality or causal discovery is the use of statistical algorithms to infer associations in observed data sets that are potentially causal under strict assumptions. ECA is a type of causal inference distinct from causal modeling and treatment effects in randomized controlled trials. It is exploratory research usually preceding more formal causal research in the same way exploratory data analysis often precedes statistical hypothesis testing in data analysis

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Hechter</span> American sociologist

Michael Hechter is an American sociologist and Foundation Professor of Political Science at Arizona State University. He is also Emeritus Professor of Sociology at the University of Washington.

Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World (1966) is a book by Barrington Moore Jr.

References

  1. Mission of the Comparative and Historical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association. www2.asanet.org/sectionchs/sectioninfo.html Archived 2011-09-14 at the Wayback Machine (Accessed 15 December 2011).
  2. Bernhard, Michael; O’Neill, Daniel (2021). "Comparative Historical Analysis". Perspectives on Politics. 19 (3): 699–704. doi: 10.1017/S1537592721001936 . ISSN   1537-5927.
  3. J. Adams, E.S. Clemens, and A.S. Orloff. 2005. Remaking Modernity: Politics, History, and Sociology. Duke University Press.
  4. For example, Democracy In America . 1969 [1835-40]. Trans. George Lawrence. Perennial Classics.
  5. For example, "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte." 1979 [1852]. In Marx/Engels Collected Works, Vol. 11. International Publishers. pg. 99-197.
  6. For example, The Division of Labor in Society . 1984 [1893]. Trans. W.D. Halls. The Free Press.
  7. For example, Economy And Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology . 1968 [1922]. Ed. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. University of California Press.
  8. For example, The Suppression of the African Slave Trade to the United States of America 1638-1870. In W.E.B. Du Bois Writings. Library of America. pg. 1-356.
  9. D. Smith. 1991. The Rise of Historical Sociology. Temple University Press.
  10. For example, Bendix, Reinhard, Nation-Building and Citizenship: Studies of Our Changing Social Order. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964.
  11. For example, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World. 1966. Beacon Press.
  12. For example, States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China . 1979. Cambridge University Press.
  13. For example, Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1992. 1992. Blackwell Publishing.
  14. For example, The Sources of Social Power, Vols. 1-2. 1986-93. Cambridge University Press.
  15. Revolution in the Development of Capitalism: The Coming of the English Revolution. 1987. University of California Press.
  16. For example, P. Bourdieu. 1988 [1984]. Homo Academicus. Trans. Peter Collier. Stanford University Press.
  17. For example, "The Rule of the Father: Patriarchy and Patrimonialism in Early Modern Europe." 2005. In Max Weber's Economy and Society: A Critical Companion. Ed. C. Camic, P.S. Gorski, and D.M. Trubek. Stanford University Press
  18. Carnal Knowledge and Imperial Power: Race and the Intimate in Colonial Rule. 2002. University of California Press.
  19. The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe. 2003. University of Chicago Press.
  20. J. Mahoney. 2003. "Knowledge Accumulation in Comparative Historical Research: The Case of Democracy and Authoritarianism." In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. Ed. J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer. Cambridge University Press.
  21. "UNKNOWN". Archived from the original on 2007-10-31. Retrieved 2007-11-27.
  22. 1 2 3 Schutt, R. K. (2006). Investigating the Social World: The Process and Practice of Research . London: SAGE Publications.
  23. Skocpol, Theda; Somers, Margaret (1980). "The Uses of Comparative History in Macrosocial Inquiry". Comparative Studies in Society and History. 22 (2): 174–197. doi: 10.1017/s0010417500009282 . ISSN   0010-4175.
  24. Beck, Colin J. (2018). "The Structure of Comparison in the Study of Revolution". Sociological Theory. 36 (2): 134–161. doi:10.1177/0735275118777004. ISSN   0735-2751. S2CID   53669466.
  25. Yom, Sean (2015). "From Methodology to Practice: Inductive Iteration in Comparative Research". Comparative Political Studies. 48 (5): 616–644. doi:10.1177/0010414014554685. ISSN   0010-4140. S2CID   143936902. Archived from the original on 2022-05-22. Alt URL
  26. "UNKNOWN" . Retrieved 2007-11-27.
  27. Mahoney, J; Rueschemeyer, D. (2003). Comparative historical analysis of the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  28. "UNKNOWN" . Retrieved 2007-11-27.[ permanent dead link ]
  29. Julia Adams (2005). The Familial State: Ruling Families and Merchant Capitalism in Early Modern Europe. Cornell University Press. ISBN   0-8014-3308-8.

Further reading