The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework
Abstract
John Gerring's exceptional textbook has been thoroughly revised in this second edition. It offers a one-volume introduction to social science methodology relevant to the disciplines of anthropology, economics, history, political science, psychology and sociology. This new edition has been extensively developed with the introduction of new material and a thorough treatment of essential elements such as conceptualization, measurement, causality and research design. It is written for students, long-time practitioners and methodologists and covers both qualitative and quantitative methods. It synthesizes the vast and diverse field of methodology in a way that is clear, concise and comprehensive. While offering a handy overview of the subject, the book is also an argument about how we should conceptualize methodological problems. Thinking about methodology through this lens provides a new framework for understanding work in the social sciences.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In variance-based approaches, the methodological gold standard is an actual experiment, or RCT, which if properly designed enables strong causal inferences about the mean causal effect of a given treatment variable within the studied sample.
“In variance-based approaches, the methodological gold standard is an actual experiment (randomized controlled trial, or RCT), which if properly designed, enables strong causal inferences about the mean causal effect of a given treatment variable within the studied sample (Gerring, 2011; Clarke et al, 2014).”
From Multi-Method Research in the Social Sciences: A Review of Recent Frameworks and a Way Forward (2020) · cites this paper as Gerring, 2011
Humphrey and Jacobs do not distinguish between experimentally manipulated data, data from natural experiments in which causation can be attributed if certain assumptions hold, and purely correlational data that most philosophers and methodologists would claim does not enable causal inferences.
“Causal language is used in relation to all large-n correlational data, meaning they do not distinguish between experimentally manipulated data, data from natural experiments in which causation can be attributed if certain assumptions hold, and purely correlational data that most philosophers and methodologists would claim does not enable causal inferences (e.g. Woodward, 2003; Gerring, 2011).”
From Multi-Method Research in the Social Sciences: A Review of Recent Frameworks and a Way Forward (2020) · cites this paper as Gerring, 2011
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Selecting Appropriate Cases When Tracing Causal Mechanisms
Beach, D., & Pedersen, R. B. (2018) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124115622510 · Cited by 198
Mixing Methods: A Bayesian Approach
HUMPHREYS, M., & JACOBS, A. M. (2015) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055415000453 · Cited by 198
Fuzzy Sets on Shaky Ground: Parameter Sensitivity and Confirmation Bias in fsQCA
Krogslund, C., Choi, D. D., & Poertner, M. (2015) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpu016 · Cited by 136
Multi-Method Research in the Social Sciences: A Review of Recent Frameworks and a Way Forward
Beach, D. (2020) · Government and Opposition · doi:10.1017/gov.2018.53 · Cited by 43
“…between experimentally manipulated data, data from natural experiments in which causation can be attributed if certain assumptions hold, and purely correlational data that most philosophers and methodologists would claim does not enable causal inferences (e.g. Gerring 2011; Woodward 2003).”
BackgroundInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Gerring, J.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gerring, John
- ORCID
- Gerring, John
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2011-12-15
- OpenAlex
- W4240193844
- Cited by
- 154
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.54
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Social Science and Policy Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
- Keywords
- social science methodology, conceptualization, measurement, causality, research design, qualitative research, quantitative methods, philosophy of social science, methodological issues
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
