Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T04:15:35.952Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Causal-Process Observation an Oxymoron?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Nathaniel Beck
Nathaniel Beck*
Affiliation:
Department of Politics, New York University, New York, NY 10003. e-mail: nathaniel.beck@nyu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When I first read King, Keohane, and Verba (1994) (KKV), I was excited by the general theme of what seemed to me the obvious, but usually unspoken, idea that all political scientists, both quantitative and qualitative, are scientists and governed by the same scientific standards. KKV, as Henry Brady (Brady and Collier 2004, chap. 3) cleverly notes, clearly were preaching to the qualitative researcher, and the subject of the sermon was that qualitative researchers should adopt many of the ideas standard in quantitative research. Thus, to abuse both the metaphor and KKV, one might compare KKV to the view of the Inquisition that we are all God's children. But, having sat through many talks based on case studies, it is clear to me that getting everyone to think about the nature of the scientific enterprise we are all engaged in can only be a good thing.

Information

Type
Symposium on Rethinking Social Inquiry
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 14 , Issue 3: Special Issue on Causal Complexity and Qualitative Methods , Summer 2006 , pp. 347 - 352
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Brady, Henry E., and Collier, David C., eds. 2004. Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Gill, Jeff, and Walker, Lee D. 2005. Elicited priors for Bayesian model specifications in political science research. Journal of Politics 67: 841–72.Google Scholar
King, Gary M., Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leamer, Edward. 1978. Specification searches: Ad hoc inference with nonexperimental data. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lott, John. 2000. Gore might lose a second round: Media suppressed the Bush vote. Philadelphia Inquirer, November 14, 25A.Google Scholar
Stokes, Susan Carol. 2001. Mandates and democracy: Neoliberalism by surprise in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannenwald, Nina. 1999. The nuclear taboo: The United States and the normative basis of nuclear non-use. International Organizations 53: 433–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar