| ID | 097023 |
| Title Proper | Historical knowledge and quantitative analysis |
| Other Title Information | the case of the origins of proportional representation |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Kreuzer, Marcus |
| Publication | 2010. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Political scientists commonly draw on history but often do not read actual historians carefully. This limited engagement with historians, and with contextual information more generally, contributes to a loss of historical knowledge that can undermine the validity of quantitative analysis. This article makes this argument by means of an examination of the qualitative evidence underlying the important quantitative arguments about the origins of electoral systems advanced by Carles Boix and by Thomas Cusack, Torben Iversen, and David Soskice. The article explores how their respective attention to historical knowledge affects the quality of their data, the plausibility of their hypotheses, and, ultimately, the robustness of their statistical findings. It also analyzes how such knowledge sheds new light on the causal direction between institutions and their economic effects. |
| `In' analytical Note | American Political Science Review Vol. 104, No. 2; May 2010: p369-392 |
| Journal Source | American Political Science Review Vol. 104, No. 2; May 2010: p369-392 |
| Key Words | Political Scientist ; Proportional Representation ; Electoral System ; America ; Political Origins |