Historical explanations seek to identify the causes of outcomes in particular cases. Although social scientists commonly develop historical explanations, they lack criteria for distinguishing different types of causes and for evaluating the relative importance of alternative causes of the same outcome. This article first provides an inventory of the five types of causes that are normally used in historical explanations: (1) necessary but not sufficient, (2) sufficient but not necessary, (3) necessary and sufficient, (4) INUS, and (5) SUIN causes. It then introduces a new method—sequence elaboration—for evaluating the relative importance of causes. Sequence elaboration assesses the importance of causes through consideration of their position within a sequence and through consideration of the types of causes that make up the sequence as a whole. Throughout the article, methodological points are illustrated with substantive examples from the field of international and comparative studies.
Abbott, A. (2001). Time matters: On theory and method. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Adams, J., Clemens, E. S., & Orloff, A. S. (Eds.). (2005). Remaking modernity: Politics, history, and sociology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
3.
Bennett, A., & Elman, C. (2007). Case study methods in the international relations subfield. Comparative Political Studies, 40(2), 170-195.
4.
Brady, H. (2008). Causation and explanation in social science. In J. M. Box-Steffensmeier, H. Brady, & D. Collier (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political methodology (pp. 217-270). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
5.
Brady, H. E., & Collier, D. (Eds.). (2004). Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
6.
Braumoeller, B.F. (2003). Causal complexity and the study of politics. Political Analysis, 11(3), 209-233.
7.
Braumoeller, B.F., & Goertz, G. (2000). The methodology of necessary conditions. American Journal of Political Science, 44(4), 844-858.
8.
Brooks, S.G., & Wohlforth, W.C. (2000-2001). Power, globalization, and the end of the cold war: Reevaluating a landmark case for ideas. International Security, 25(3), 5-53.
9.
Brooks, S.G., & Wohlforth, W.C. (2002). From old thinking to new thinking in qualitative research. International Security, 26(4), 93-111.
10.
Clark, W.R., Gilligan, M.J., & Golder, M. (2006). A simple multivariate test for asymmetric hypotheses . Political Analysis, 14(3), 311-331.
11.
Deyo, F. (Ed.). (1987). The political economy of the new Asian industrialism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
12.
Dion, D. (1998). Evidence and inference in the comparative case study. Comparative Politics, 30(2), 127-145.
13.
Downing, B.M. (1992). The military revolution and political change: Origins of democracy and autocracy in early modern Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
Downs, G. (1989). The rational deterrence debate. World Politics, 41(2), 225-237.
15.
Eliason, S., & Stryker, R. (in press). Goodness-of-fit tests and descriptive measures in fuzzy-set analysis. Sociological Methods and Research.
16.
Elman, C. (2005). Explanatory typologies in qualitative studies of international politics. International Organization, 59(2), 293-326.
17.
English, R. (2002). Power, ideas, and new evidence on the cold war's end: A reply to Brooks and Wohlforth. International Security , 26(4), 70-92.
18.
Geddes, B. (2003). Paradigms and sandcastles: Theory building and research design in comparative politics. Ann Arbor, MI : University of Michigan Press.
19.
Gerring, J. (2005). Causation: A unified framework for the social sciences. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 17, 163-198.
20.
Gerring, J. (2007). The mechanistic worldview: Thinking inside the box. British Journal of Political Science, 38(1), 161-179.
21.
George, A.L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
22.
Goertz, G. (2003a). The substantive importance of necessary condition hypotheses. In G. Goertz & H. Starr (Eds.), Necessary conditions: Theory, methodology, and applications (pp. 65-94). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
23.
Goertz, G. (2003b). Cause, correlation, and necessary conditions . In G. Goertz & H. Starr (Eds.), Necessary conditions: Theory, methodology, and applications (pp. 47-64). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
24.
Goertz, G. (2006). Assessing the trivialness, relevance, and relative importance of necessary or sufficient conditions in social science. Studies in Comparative International Development, 41(2), 88-109.
25.
Goertz, G., & Levy, J. (Eds.). (2007). Explaining war and peace: Case studies and necessary condition counterfactuals. London: Routledge.
26.
Goertz, G., & Starr, H. (Eds.). (2003). Necessary conditions: Theory, methodology, and applications. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
27.
Goldhagen, D.J. (1996). Hitler's willing executioners: Ordinary Germans and the holocaust. New York: Knopf .
28.
Haggard, S. (1990). Pathways from the periphery: The politics of growth in newly industrializing countries. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
29.
Honoré, T., and Hart, H.L.A. (1985). Causation in the law (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
30.
Kendall, P. L. (Ed.). (1982). The varied sociology of Paul F. Lazarsfeld. New York: Columbia University Press.
31.
Lebow, R.N. (2000). Contingency, catalysts, and international system change. Political Science Quarterly, 115(4), 591-616.
32.
Levy, J.S. (1990). Preferences, constraints, and choices in July 1914. International Security, 15(3), 151-186.
33.
Luebbert, G.M. (1991). Liberalism, fascism, or social democracy: Social classes and the political origins of regimes in interwar Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
Mackie, J.L. (1965). Causes and conditions. American Philosophical Quarterly, 2, 245-264.
35.
Mackie, J.L. (1980). Cement of the universe: A study of causation. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
36.
Mahoney, J. (1999). Nominal, ordinal, and narrative appraisal in macrocausal analysis. American Journal of Sociology, 104(4), 1154-1196.
37.
Mahoney, J. (2001). The legacies of liberalism: Path dependence and political regimes in Central America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
38.
Mahoney, J. (2008). Toward a unified theory of causality. Comparative Political Studies, 41(4/5), 412-436.
39.
Mahoney, J., & Goertz, G. (2006). A tale of two cultures: Contrasting quantitative and qualitative research. Political Analysis, 14(3), 227-249.
40.
Mahoney, J., & Rueschemeyer, D. (Eds.). (2003). Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Mahoney, J., & Terrie, P.L. (2008). Comparative-historical analysis in contemporary political science. In J. M. Box-Steffensmeier , H. Brady, & D. Collier (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political methodology (pp. 737-755). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
42.
Moore, B., Jr. (1966). Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: Lord and peasant in the making of the modern world. Boston : Beacon.
43.
Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44.
Pierson, P. (2007). The costs of marginalization: Qualitative methods in the study ofAmerican politics. Comparative Political Studies , 40(2), 146-169.
45.
Potter, M. (2004). Set theory and its philosophy: A critical introduction . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
46.
Ragin, C.C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
47.
Ragin, C.C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
48.
Ragin, C.C. (2006). Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage. Political Analysis, 14(3), 291-310.
49.
Roberts, C. (1996). The logic of historical explanation. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press .
50.
Russett, B. (1993). Grasping the democratic peace: Principles for a post-cold war world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
51.
Skocpol, T. (1992). Protecting soldiers and mothers: The political origins of social policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
52.
Thelen, K. (2004). How institutions evolve: The political economy of skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Waldner, D. (1999). State building and late development. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
54.
Woodward, J. (2003). Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
55.
Yashar, D.J. (1997). Demanding democracy: Reform and reaction in Costa Rica and Guatemala, 1870s-1950s. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
