Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Innovation in historical research: A computer approach

  • Published:
Computers and the Humanities Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. See, for example, A. M. Schlesinger, Jr., “The Humanist Looks at Empirical Research,”American Sociological Review, XXVII (1962), 770.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Stephan Thernstrom, “The Historian and the Computer,” inComputers in Humanistic Research, ed. Edmund A. Bowles (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967), 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  3. An Introduction to the Classification of Animals (1869), quoted in Peter W. Hemingway, “Multiple Agreement Analysis” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961), 1.

  4. Abraham Kaplan,The Conduct of Inquiry (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 1964), 172–183.

    Google Scholar 

  5. For a lucid introduction to scale analysis, see Edward Suchman, “The Logic of Scale Construction,”Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10 (1950), 79–93.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Thomas Alexander,Sectional Stress and Party Strength (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1967); Joel Silbey,The Shrine of Party: Congressional Voting Behavior, 1841–1852 (Pittsburgh: The University of Pittsburgh Press, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Philip Stone, Dexter C. Dunphy, Marshall S. Smith, Daniel M. Ogilvie, et al.,The General Inquirer: A Computer Approach to Content Analysis (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  8. “Content Analysis Research in the Social Sciences,” Paper read before the Texas A & M Conference on Computers for Humanistic Research, College Station, Texas, November 17–18, 1966. (Mimeographed.)

  9. Frederick Mosteller and David L. Wallace,Inference and Disputed Authorship: The Federalist (Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Richard L. Merritt,Symbols of American Community 1734–1775 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  11. An excellent introduction to factor analysis is R. J. Rummell, “Understanding Factor Analysis,”Journal of Conflict Resolution, XI (December 1967), 444–480. For more detailed information consult Harry H. Harman,Modern Factor Analysis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960) and Raymond B. Cattel (ed.),Handbook of Multivariate Experimental Psychology (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Raymond B. Cattell, “The Data Box: Its Ordering of Total Resources in Terms of Possible Relational Systems,” inHandbook of Multivariate Experimental Psychology, 67–128.

  13. Louis L. McQuitty, “Elementary Factor Analysis,”Psychological Reports, 9 (January 1961), 71–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. “A Theory of Critical Elections,”Journal of Politics, 17 (1955), 3–18.

  15. For one example of the application of factor analysis to election returns see Duncan MacRae, Jr. and James A. Meldrum, “Critical Elections in Illinois, 1888–1958,”American Political Science Review, 54 (1962), 669–683.

    Google Scholar 

  16. The Democratic percentage of the two-party vote was obtained fromOklahoma Votes, 1907–1962 (Norman: Bureau of Government Research, University of Oklahoma, 1964). Mr. Thomas Steele, a Lew Wentz Scholar at Oklahoma State University, was of great assistance in coding this information for keypunching.

  17. I have benefitted greatly from the work of entomologists Robert R. Sokal and Charles D. Michener, who have used Q-technique in their taxonomical work. See the following:The University of Kansas Science Bulletin, XXXVIII (March 1958), 1909–1938; “A Quantitative Approach to a Problem in Classification,”Evolution, 11 (June 1957), 130–62; “Quantification of Systematic Relationships and of Phylogenetic Trends,”Proceedings Tenth International Congress of Entomology, Vol. 1 (1956, 1958), 410–415. Another useful work is Robert K. Sokal and Peter H. A. Sneath,Numerical Taxonomy (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  18. For a full account see Charles M. Dollar, “The Senate Progressive Movement, 1921–1933. A Roll Call Analysis” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kentucky, 1966).

  19. Howard W. Allen, “Geography and Politics: Voting on Reform Issues in the United States Senate, 1911–1916,”Journal of Southern History, XXVII (May 1962), 216–223.

    Google Scholar 

  20. George W. Mowry,The California Progressives (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1951); Alfred D. Chandler, “The Origins of Progressive Leadership,” in Elting E. Morison and John Blum (eds.)The Letters of Theodore Roosevelt (8 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1951–1954), Appendix III of Volume VIII; Otis L. Graham, Jr.,An Encore for Reform: The Old Progressives and the New Deal (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 187–212.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oklahoma State University, USA

    Charles M. Dollar (history faculty)

Authors
  1. Charles M. Dollar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

A slightly different version of this article was read before the Social Science Section of the Oklahoma Academy of Science, December 2, 1967. The preparation of this article was generously supported by the Oklahoma State University Research Foundation and the Oklahoma State University Computer Center.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dollar, C.M. Innovation in historical research: A computer approach. Comput Hum 3, 139–151 (1969). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02401604

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02401604

Keywords

Search

Navigation