Advertisement

A History of Causal Analysis in the Social Sciences

  • Sondra N. BarringerEmail author
  • Scott R. Eliason
  • Erin Leahey
Chapter
Part of the Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research book series (HSSR)

Abstract

In this chapter we provide an overview of the history of causal analysis in the social sciences. We review literature published from the mid-1800s to the present day, tracing the key strains of thought that lead to our current understandings of causal analysis in the social sciences. Given space limitations, we focus on three of the most important strands of causal analysis – those based on (1) constant conjunction and regularity accounts, (2) correlational and path analytic techniques, and (3) potential outcomes and counterfactual frameworks. We then return to the complexity of a Weberian approach, which contains nearly all of the elements of these three major frameworks into a single case-oriented method to causal analysis. We conclude by speculating on the future of causal analysis in the social sciences.

Keywords

Structural Equation Model Causal Effect Causal Analysis Average Treatment Effect Female Labor Force Participation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Stephen L. Morgan and Robin Stryker for their invaluable time and comments, which helped to make this chapter all the better. We, of course, are solely responsible for any remaining errors.

References

  1. Angrist, J. D. (1990). Lifetime earnings and the Vietnam era draft lottery: Evidence from social security administrative records. The American Economic Review, 80, 313–336.Google Scholar
  2. Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G., & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 444–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, S. O., & Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The Stata Journal, 2, 358–377.Google Scholar
  4. Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1961a). Causal inference in nonexperimental research. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  5. Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1961b). Correlation and causality: The multivariate case. Social Forces, 39, 246–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1962). Four-variable causal models and partial correlations. The American Journal of Sociology, 68, 182–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1969). Multiple indicators and the causal approach to measurement error. The American Journal of Sociology, 75, 264–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2004). Autoregressive latent trajectories (ALT) models: A synthesis of two traditions. Sociological Methods & Research, 32, 336–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bollen, K. A., & Curran, P. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Bollen, K. A., & Paxton, P. (1998). Detection and determinants of bias in subjective measures. American Sociological Review, 63, 465–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bowden, R. J., & Turkington, D. A. (1984). Instrumental variables. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caren, N., & Panofsky, A. (2005). TQCA: A technique for adding temporality to qualitative comparative analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 34, 147–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duncan, O. D. (1966). Path analysis: Sociological examples. The American Journal of Sociology, 72, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Duncan, O. D. (1975). Introduction to structural equation models. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  17. Duncan, O. D., Haller, A. O., & Portes, A. (1968). Peer influences on aspirations: A reinterpretation. The American Journal of Sociology, 74, 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Durkheim, E. (1938). The rules of sociological method (S. A. Solovay & J. H. Mueller, Trans.). Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  19. Eliason, S. R., & Stryker, R. (2009). Goodness-of-fit tests and descriptive measures in fuzzy set analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 38, 102–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eliason, S. R., Stryker, R., & Tranby, E. (2008). The welfare state, family policies and women’s labor forces participation: Combining fuzzy-set and statistical methods to assess causal relations and estimate causal effects. In L. Kenworthy & A. Hicks (Eds.), Method and substance in macrocomparative analysis, research methods series (pp. 135–195). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Epstein, J., Duerr, D., Kenworthy, L., & Ragin, C. C. (2008). Comparative employment performance: A fuzzy-set analysis. In L. Kenworthy & A. Hicks (Eds.), Method and substance in macrocomparative analysis, research methods series (pp. 67–90). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Fisher, R. A. (1935). The design of experiments. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
  23. Freedman, D. A. (1987). As others see us: A case study in path analysis (with discussion). Journal of Educational Statistics, 12, 101–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gangl, M. (2010). Causal inference in sociological research. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 21–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goldberger, A. S. (1972). Structural equation methods in the social sciences. Econometrica, 40, 979–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grant, D., Morales, A., & Sallaz, J. J. (2009). Pathways to meaning: A new approach to studying emotions at work. The American Journal of Sociology, 115, 327–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haavelmo, T. (1943). The statistical implications of a system of simultaneous equations. Econometrica, 11, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heckman, J. J. (2000). Causal parameters and policy analysis in economics: A twentieth century retrospective. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115, 45–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heckman, J. J. (2005). The scientific model of causality. Sociological Methodology, 35, 1–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holland, P. W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 945–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hood, W. C., & Koopmans, T. C. (1953). Studies in econometric method. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  32. Hume, D. (1896). A treatise of human nature. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  33. Jöreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In A. Goldberger & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 85–112). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  34. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8 user’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  35. Keesling, J. W. (1972). Maximum likelihood approaches to causal flow analysis. Chicago: Department of Education, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  36. Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Leahey, E. (2006). Gender differences in productivity: Research specialization as a missing link. Gender and Society, 20, 754–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Leahey, E. (2007). Not by productivity alone: How visibility and specialization contribute to academic earnings. American Sociological Review, 72, 533–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lewis, D. (1973). Causation. The Journal of Philosophy, 70, 556–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lewis, D. (2000). Causation as influence. Journal of Philosophy, 97, 182–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lizardo, O. (2006). How cultural tastes shape personal networks. American Sociological Review, 71, 778–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mahoney, J. (2003). Long-run development and the legacy of colonialism in Spanish America. The American Journal of Sociology, 109, 51–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matsueda, R. L. (2012). Key advances in the history of structural equation modeling. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 17–42). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  44. Mill, J. S. (1882). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of scientific investigation. New York: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
  45. Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2007). Counterfactuals and causal inference: Methods and principles for social research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Muthen, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49, 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Muthen, B. (1987). Response to freedman’s critique of path analysis: Improve credibility by better methodological training. Journal of Educational Statistics, 12, 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Neyman, J. (1923). On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. Essay on principles. Section 9. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych Tom X [in Polish]; translated in Statistical Science 5, 465–480.Google Scholar
  49. Neyman, J., & Pearson, E. S. (1928). On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference. Biometrika, 20A(175–240), 63–94.Google Scholar
  50. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Pearl, J. (2009a). Causal inference in statistics: An overview. Statistics Surveys, 3, 96–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pearl, J. (2009b). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pearl, J. (2010). The foundations of causal inference. Sociological Methodology, 40, 75–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pearson, K. (1900). The grammar of science. London: Adam & Charles Black.Google Scholar
  55. Pedriana, N., & Stryker, R. (2004). The strength of a weak agency: Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the expansion of state capacity, 1965–1971. The American Journal of Sociology, 110, 709–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Peirce, C. S., & Jastrow, J. (1884). On small differences of sensation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 3, 75–83.Google Scholar
  57. Raftery, A. E. (1986). Choosing models for cross-classifications. American Sociological Review, 51, 145–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Raftery, A. E. (1993). Bayesian model selection in structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 163–180). Newberry Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  59. Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  61. Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ragin, C. C., & Strand, S. I. (2005). Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal order comment on caren and panofsky. Sociological Methods & Research, 36, 431–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ringer, F. (1997). Max Weber’s methodology: The unification of the cultural and social sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Ringer, F. (2002). Max Weber on causal analysis, interpretation, and comparison. History and Theory, 41, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Robins, J. M., Hernan, M. A., & Brumback, B. (2000). Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology, 11, 550–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rubin, D. B. (1977). Assignment of treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of Educational Statistics, 2, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rubin, D. B. (1978). Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization. The Annals of Statistics, 6, 34–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rubin, D. B. (1981). Estimation in parallel randomized experiments. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 377–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rubin, D. B. (1986). Statistics and causal inference: Comment: Which ifs have causal answers? Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 961–962.Google Scholar
  73. Rubin, D. B. (2001). Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: Application to the tobacco litigation. Health Service Outcomes Research Methodology, 2, 169–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rubin, D. B. (2005). Causal inference using potential outcomes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 322–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sewell, W. H., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). Education, opportunity, and earnings: Achievement in the early career. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  76. Simon, H. A. (1954). Spurious correlation: A causal interpretation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 467–479.Google Scholar
  77. Skocpol, T. (1979). States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Small, A. W. (1898). The methodology of the social problem. Division I. The sources and uses of material. The American Journal of Sociology, 4, 113–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sobel, M. E. (1995). Causal inference in the social and behavioral sciences. In G. Arminger, C. C. Clogg, & M. E. Sobel (Eds.), Handbook of statistical modeling for the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 1–38). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  80. Sobel, M. E. (1996). An introduction to causal inference. Sociological Methods & Research, 24, 353–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sobel, M. E. (2005). Discussion: The scientific model of causality. Sociological Methodology, 35, 99–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Spearman, C. (1904). General intelligence, objectively determined and measured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Stryker, R. (1989). Limits on technocratization of the law: The elimination of the National Labor Relations Board’s Division of Economic Research. American Sociological Review, 54, 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Stryker, R. (1990). Science, class and the welfare state: A class-centered functional account. The American Journal of Sociology, 96, 684–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. aStryker, R. (1996). Beyond history vs. theory: Strategic narrative and sociological explanation. In P. J. Dubeck and K. Borman (Eds.), Women and work: A handbook (pp. 74–77). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  86. aStryker, R., Docka-Filipek, D., & Wald, P. (2011a). Employment discrimination law and industrial psychology: Social science as social authority and the co-production of law and science. Law & Social Inquiry, 37, 777–814.Google Scholar
  87. Stryker, R., Eliason, S. R., Tranby, E., & Hamilton, W. (2011b). Family policies, education and female labor market participation in advanced capitalist democracies. In G. Cohen, B. Ansell, J. Gingrich, & R. Cox (Eds.), Social policy in the smaller European Union states (pp. 42–70). New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  88. avon Kries, J. (1888). Uber den Begriff der objektiven Mtiglichkeit. Zeitschriftfiir wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 12, 180–220.Google Scholar
  89. Walker, H., & Cohen, B. (1985). Scope statements: Imperatives for evaluating theory. American Sociological Review, 50, 288–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wiley, D. E. (1973). The identification problem for structural equation models with unmeasured variables. In A. Goldberger & O. D. Duncan (Eds.), Structural equation models in the social sciences (pp. 69–84). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  91. Winship, C., & Morgan, S. L. (1999). The estimation of causal effects from observational data. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 659–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wright, S. (1920). The relative importance of heredity and environment in determining the piebald pattern of guinea pigs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 6, 320–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wright, S. (1921). Correlation and causation. Journal of Agricultural Research, 20, 557–585.Google Scholar
  94. Wright, S. (1925). Corn and hog correlations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
  95. Wright, S. (1934). The method of path coefficients. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 5, 161–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Wundt, W. (1883). Logik (Methodenlehre, Vol. 2). Stuttgart: Enke.Google Scholar
  97. Yule, G. U. (1896). On the correlation of total pauperism with proportion of out-relief. The Economic Journal, 6, 613–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Yule, G. U. (1932). An introduction to the theory of statistics. London: Charles Griffin and Co.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sondra N. Barringer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Scott R. Eliason
    • 1
  • Erin Leahey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations