Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:01:35.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Murray Murphey and the Possibility of Social Science History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2016

Jerome M. Clubb
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Application of social scientific methods and approaches to the study of history has always been the subject of considerable and often acrimonious debate. In recent years, however, the terms of the debate have taken a somewhat different and, to some of us, surprising turn. Notes of pessimism and defensiveness have entered the arguments of practitioners; some feel the need to repeat the once useful polemics of twenty odd years ago; and there is talk of the intrinsic limitations of the general enterprise. At the same time, the traditionalist camp announces with a measure of glee that the tides of social scientific history are on the wane.

Type
Research Article
Information
Social Science History , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , Winter 1985 , pp. 93 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © Social Science History Association 1985 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, H. W. and Allen, K. W. (1981) “Vote fraud and data validity,” in Clubb, J. M., Flanigan, W. H. and Zingale, N. H. (eds.) Analyzing Electoral History: A Guide to the Study of American Voter Behavior. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications: 153–194.Google Scholar
Burnham, W. D. (1974a) “Theory and voting research: some reflections on Converse’s ‘Change in the American electorate.’” American Political Science Review 68 (September): 1002–1023.Google Scholar
Burnham, W. D. (1974b) “Rejoinder to comments by Philip Converse and Jerrold Rusk.” American Political Science Review 68 (September): 1050–1057.Google Scholar
Burnham, W. D. (1965) “The changing shape of the American political universe.” American Political Science Review 59 (March): 7–28.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. (1974) “Comment on Burnham’s ‘theory and voting research.’” American Political Science Review 68 (September): 1024–1027.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. (1972) “Change in the American electorate,” in Campbell, A. and Converse, P. E. (eds.) The Human Meaning of Social Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 263–337.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. (1964) “The nature of belief systems in mass publics,” in Apter, D. E. (ed.) Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Homans, G. C. (1968) The Nature of Social Science, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
Huntington, S. P. (1968) Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Murphey, M. G. (1981) Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Organization of American Historians.Google Scholar
Murphey, M. G. (1973) Our Knowledge of the Historical Past. Indianapolis and New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co.Google Scholar
Rusk, J. G. (1974) “Comment: the American electoral universe: speculation and evidence.” American Political Science Review 68 (September): 1028–1049.Google Scholar
Rusk, J. G. (1970) “The effect of the Australian ballot reform on split-ticket voting: 1976-1908.” The American Political Science Review 64 (December): 1220–1238.Google Scholar
Shortridge, R. M. (1981) “Estimating voter participation,” in Clubb, J. M., Flanigan, W. H. and Zingale, N. H. (eds.) Analyzing Electoral History: A Guide to the Study of American Voter Behavior. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications: 137–152.Google Scholar
Tilly, C. (1972) “Quantification in history, as seen from France,” in Lorwin, V. R. and Price, J. M. (eds.) The Dimensions of the Past: Materials, Problems and Opportunities for Quantitative Works in History. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar