Comparative-Historical Methodology in Political Sociology

  • Edgar Kiser
  • Steve Pfaff
Part of the Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research book series (HSSR)

Debates about the methodology of comparative and historical work have raged since its inception. They are in part a function of the difficulties encountered in this type of work — data from the past are not only incomplete but samples are biased and several types of methods (experiments, surveys, observational techniques) cannot be used. Unfortunately, many of the methodological debates have been waged between advocates of one type of data (e.g., quantitative, archival) or one particular methodology (e.g., Mill's methods, game theory) interested in pushing for its broader (or even universal) use. Our approach in this chapter is to explore the strengths and weaknesses of several different types of data and methods and to try to outline the conditions in which each will be most useful.


Game Theory Historical Work Political Behavior Qualitative Comparative Analysis Narrative Analysis 
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.


  1. Abbott, Andrwe and John Forrest. 1986. “Optimal Matching Methods for Historical Data” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 16:473–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott, Andrew and Alexandra Hrycak. 1990. “Measuring Sequence Resemblace” American Journal of Sociology 96:144–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abbott, Andrew and Emily Barman. 1997. “Sequence Comparison via Alignment and Gibbs Sampling: A Formal Analysis of the Emergence of the Modern Sociological Article” Sociological Methodology 27:47–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abell, Peter. 1987. The Syntax of Social Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Adams, Julia, Elizabeth Clemens and Ann Shola Orloff (eds.). 2005. Remaking Modernity. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Agresti, Alan. 2002. Categorical Data Analysis. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Amenta, Edwin. 2006. When Movements Matter: The Townsend Plan and the Rise of Social Security. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Aminzade, Ronald. 1992. “Historical Sociology and Time” Sociological Methods and Research 20(4):456–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Archer, Robin. 2007. Why is there No Labor Party in the United States? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bates, Robert, Avner Greif, Margaret Levi, Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, and Barry Weingast 1998. Analytic Narratives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bennett, Andrew. 2008. “Process Tracing: A Bayesian Approach” Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Janet Box-Steffensmeier, Henry Brady, and David Collier (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bollen, Kenneth, Barbara Entwisle and Arthur S. Alderson. 1993. “Macrocomparative Research Methods” Annual Review of Sociology 19:321–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, Cliff and Terry Boswell. 1995. “Strikebreaking or Solidarity in the Great steel Strike of 1919: A Split Labor Market, Game-Theoretic, and QCA Analysis” American Journal of Sociology 100(6):1479–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burawoy, Michael. 1989. “Two Methods in search of science: Skocpol vs. Trotsky” Theory and Society 18:759–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burke, Peter, Ed. 1991. New Perspectives on Historical Writing. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  16. Camerer, Colin. 2003. “Progress in Behavioral Game Theory” Journal of Economic Perspectives 11(4):167–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Collins, Randall and Hanneman. 1995. “Discovering Theory Dynamics by Computer Simulation: Experiments on State Legitimacy and Imperialist Capitalism” Sociological Methodology 25:1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Conrad, Alfred. H. and John R. Myer. 1958. “The Economics of Slavery in the Antebellum South.” Journal of Political Economy 66/2:95–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ebbinghaus, Bernhard. 2005. “When Less is More: Selection Problems in Large-N and Small-N Cross-National Comparisons.” International Sociology 20/2:133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eliason, Scott and Robin Stryker. Forthcoming. “Goodness-of-Fit Tests and Descriptive Measures in Fuzzy Set Analysis” Sociological Methods and Research Google Scholar
  21. Emigh, Rebecca. 1997. “The Power of Negative Thinking: The Use of Negative Case Methodology in the Development of Sociological Theory” Theory and Society 26:649–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ermakoff, Ivan. 2008. Ruling Oneself Out. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Fogel, Robert. 1964. Railroads and American Economic Growth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkings University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fogel, Robert and Stanley Engerman. 1974. Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  25. Froese, Paul, and Steven Pfaff. 2001. “Replete and Desolate Markets: Poland, East Germany and the New Religious Paradigm Social Forces Google Scholar
  26. Gail, M., R. Williams, D. Byar, and C Brown. 1976. “How Many Controls” Journals of Chronic Disease 29:723–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Geddes, Barbara. 1990. “How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics” Pp. 131–50 in James Stimson (ed) Political Analysis, Volume 2. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  28. Gerring, John. 2007. Case-Study Research: Principles and Practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Gerteis, Joseph. 2007. Class and the Color Line: Interracial Class Coalition in the Knights of Labor and the Populist Movement. Durham, NC: Duke University PressGoogle Scholar
  30. Gintis, Herbert. 2000. Game Theory Evolving. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Goldthorpe, John. 1991. “The Uses of History in Sociology: Reflections on Some Recent Tendencies” British Journal of Sociology 42:211–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Goldthorpe, John. 2000. On Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Gorski, Philip. 2003. The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  34. Greif, Avner. 2006. Institutions and the Path to the Modern Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Griffin, Larry. 1993. “Narrative, Event Structure Analysis, and Causal Interpretation in Historical Sociology” American Journal of Sociology 98(5):1094–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Haroutune, K.A. and D.E. Lillienfeld. 1994. “Applications of the Case—Control Method.” Epidemiologic Reviews 16/1:1–5.Google Scholar
  37. Hechter, Michael. 1992. “The Insufficiency of Game Theory for the Resolution of Real-World Collective Action Problems” Rationality and Society 4:33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Heise, David. 1988. “Computer Analysis of Cultural Structures” Social Science Computer Review 6:183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Heise, David. 1989. “Modeling Event Structures” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 14:139–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hunt, Lynn, Ed. 1989. The New Cultural History. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  41. Jarausch, Konrad H. and Kenneth A. Hardy. 1991. Quantitative Methods for Historians: A Guide to Research, Data, and Statistics. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  42. Kahnaman, Daniel and Amos Tversky. 1979. “Prospect Theory: Analysis of Decision Under Risk” Econometrica 47:263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. King, Gary. 1997. A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  45. King, Gary, Ori Rosen, and Martin Tanner, Eds. 2004. Ecological Inference: New Methodological Strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Kiser, Edgar. 1996. “The Revival of Narrative in Historical Sociology: What Rational Choice Theory Can Contribute” Politics and Society 24(3):249–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kiser, Edgar and Michael Hechter. 1991. “The Role of General Theory in Comparative-Historical Sociology” American Journal of Sociology 97:1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kiser, Edgar and April Linton. 2002. “The Hinges of History: State-Making and Revolt in Early Modern France” American Sociological Review 67(6):889–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kiser, Edgar and Howard Welser. 2007. “The Microfoundations of Analytic Narratives” Sociologica Google Scholar
  50. Kopstein, Jeffrey and Jason Wittenberg. 2003. “Who voted Communist? Reconsidering the Social Bases of Radicalism in Interwar Poland.” Slavic Review 62/1:87–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lacy, M. 1997. “Efficiently Studying Rare Events: Case—control Methods for Sociologists.” Sociological Perspectives 40/1:129–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lieberson, Stanley. 1985. Making It Count. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  53. Lillienfeld, D.E. and P.D. Stalley. 1994. Foundations of Epidemiology, 3rd Edition. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  54. Lindenberg, Siegwart. 1989. “Social Production Functions, Deficits, and Revolutions: Prerevolutionary France and Russia” Rationality and Society 3:50–76.Google Scholar
  55. Lustick, Ian. 1996. “History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical Records and the Problem of Selection Bias” American Political Science Review 90(3):605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mahoney, James. 2000. “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology” Theory and Society 29:507–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mahoney, James. 2001. The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Mahoney, James. 2003. “Strategies of Causal Assessment in Comparative-Historical Analysis” Pp. 337–372 in James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer (eds) Comparative-Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Mahoney, James 2008. “Toward a Unified Theory of Causality.” Comparative Political Studies 41/4–5:412–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Maynard-Smith, John. 1982. Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Meyer, John R. 1997. “Notes on Climetrics' Fortieth” American Economic Review 87(2):409–11.Google Scholar
  62. Moore, Barrington. 1966. The Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  63. Newman, S.C. 2001. Biostatistical Methods in Epidemiology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  64. Novick, Peter. 1988. That Noble Dream: “The Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. North, Douglas. 1961. The Economic Growth of the United States, 1790–1860.Google Scholar
  66. Pierson, Paul. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics” American Political Science Review 94:251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rabin, Matt. 1998. “Psychology and Economics” Journal of Economic Literature 36:11–46.Google Scholar
  68. Ragin, Charles. 1987. The Comparative Method. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  69. Ragin, Charles. 2000. Fuzzy Set Social Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  70. Schlesselman, J.J. 1982. Case—Control Studies: Design, Conduct, Analysis. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  71. Sewell, William Jr. 1996. “Three Temporalities: Toward an Eventful Sociology” Pp. 245–280 in Terrence McDonald (ed) The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  72. Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Somers, Margaret. 1996. “Where is Sociology After the Historic Turn?: Knowledge Cultures, Narrativity, and Historical Epistemologies” Pp. 53–90 in Terrence McDonald (ed.) The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  74. Steinmetz, George. 2007. The Devil's Handwriting. Chicago: University of ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  75. Stone, Lawrence. 1979. “The Revival of Narrative: Reflections on a New Old History” Past and Present 85:1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Stovel, Katherine. 2001. “Local Sequence Patterns: The Structure of Lynching in the Deep South, 1882–1930” Social Forces 79:843–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tilly, Charles. 1984. Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  78. Varese, Federic and Meir Yaish. 2000. “The importance of being asked: The Rescue of Jews in Nazi Europe.” Rationality and Society 12/3:307–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Varese, Federico. and Meir Yaish. 2005. “Resolute Heroes: The Rescue of Jews during the Nazi Occupation of Europe.” European Journal of Sociology XLVI/1:153–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Williamson, Samuel H. and Robert Whaples. 2003. “Cliometrics”, in Joel Mokyr, Ed., Oxford Encylopedia of Economic History. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Wittenberg, Jason. 2006. Crucibles of Political Loyalty: Church institutions and electoral continuity in Hungary. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Ziblatt, Daniel. 2006. Structuring the State: The Formation of Italy and Germany and the puzzle of federalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edgar Kiser
    • 1
  • Steve Pfaff
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations