Cited by 371Qualitative Comparative Analysis ResearchPolitical Science Research and EducationPolitical Conflict and Governance

To Explain Political Processes

Tilly, Charles·1995·American Journal of Sociology

Abstract

Analysts of large-scale political processes frequently invoke invariant models that feature self-contained and self-motivating social units. Few actual political processes conform to such models. Revolutions provide an important example of such reasoning and of its pitfalls. Better models rest on plausible ontologies, specify fields of variation for the phenomena in question, reconstruct causal sequences, and concentrate explanation on links within those sequences.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/230673

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Fourth generation accounts remain attached to the same underlying sensibility as previous generations, seeking to capture revolutions within general linear reality.

    “they remain attached to the same underlying sensibility that bedeviled previous generations of study, seeking to capture revolutions within 'general linear reality' (Abbott 1988; see also Tilly 1995).”

    From Within and Beyond the “Fourth Generation” of Revolutionary Theory (2016) · cites this paper as Tilly 1995

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tilly, C.
Corresponding author
Tilly, Charles
Venue
American Journal of Sociology
Published
1995-05
Volume
100
Issue
6
Pages
1594-1610
ISSN
  • 0002-9602 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5390
OpenAlex
W1989706913
Cited by
371
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 26
FWCI
20.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
political process, revolution, causal explanation, causal sequences, ontology, social units

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