Content area
Full Text
Key Words necessary causes, sufficient causes, temporal processes, concepts, measurement
Abstract The last decade featured the emergence of a significant and growing literature concerning comparative-historical methods. This literature offers methodological tools for causal and descriptive inference that go beyond the techniques currently available in mainstream statistical analysis. In terms of causal inference, new procedures exist for testing hypotheses about necessary and sufficient causes, and these procedures address the skepticism that mainstream methodologists may hold about necessary and sufficient causation. Likewise, new techniques are available for analyzing hypotheses that refer to complex temporal processes, including path-dependent sequences. In the area of descriptive inference, the comparative-historical literature offers important tools for concept analysis and for achieving measurement validity. Given these contributions, comparative-historical methods merit a central place within the general field of social science methodology.
INTRODUCTION
Recent years have seen a surge of publications concerning the methods used in comparative-historical analysis.1 These works reflect a growing self-consciousness about research design among comparative-historical analysts, and they address a wide range of issues concerning descriptive and causal inference that are of general importance to the social sciences. Although these studies have not yet had a large impact in the field of methodology, which is oriented toward statistical analysis,2 I argue that their insights deserve a central place within social science methodology.
This argument is developed over three sections. The first two sections consider methods of causal inference, focusing respectively on tools for analyzing necessary and sufficient causes and tools for the study of temporal processes. The third section is concerned with descriptive inference, exploring techniques of conceptual innovation and tools for achieving measurement validity. In all these discussions, the emphasis is on the distinctive contributions of comparative-historical methods-that is, contributions that go beyond what mainstream statistical methods have to offer.3 The article closes with a call for assigning comparative-historical methodology a more central place in general social science methodology.
TOOLS FOR STUDYING NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CAUSATION
Hypotheses about necessary and sufficient causes-including probabilistic necessary and sufficient causes-are commonplace in nearly all domains of research. However, to evaluate such hypotheses, researchers cannot rely on mainstream statistical tools. Standard regression frameworks will incorrectly estimate causal effects when confronted with these kinds of causes (see Braumoeller & Goertz 2000, Ragin 2000)....