Mechanism and Explanation
Abstract
The aim of this article is to elucidate the notions of explanation and mechanism, in particular of the social kind. A mechanism is defined as what makes a concrete system tick, and it is argued that to propose an explanation proper is to exhibit a lawful mechanism. The so-called covering law model is shown to exhibit only the logical aspect of explanation: it just subsumes particulars under universals. A full or mechanismic explanation involves mechanismic law statements, not purely descriptive ones such as functional relations and rate equations. Many examples from the natural, biosocial, and social sciences are examined. In particular, macro-micro-micro-macro social relations are shown to explain other wise puzzling macro-macro links. The last part of the article relates the author's progress, over half a century, toward understanding mechanism and explanation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Viewing mechanisms as intervening variables results in the actual causal process itself being grey-boxed.
“The result of viewing mechanisms as intervening variables is that the actual causal process itself is grey-boxed (Bunge, 1997: 428; Waldner, 2012).”
From It's all about mechanisms – what process-tracing case studies should be tracing (2016) · cites this paper as Bunge, 1997
Existing GVC frameworks and typologies do not provide detailed causal mechanisms, and thus do not constitute predictive theory of GVC.
“However, as mentioned above, existing GVC frameworks (e.g., Gereffi, 1994;Henderson et al., 2002) and typologies (e.g., Gereffi et al., 2005) do not provide detailed causal mechanisms (Bunge, 1997), and thus do not constitute predictive theory of GVC in a sense of offering ''a statement of relations among concepts within a set of boundary assumptions and constraints'' (Bacharach, 1989: 496).”
From Global value chains: A review of the multi-disciplinary literature (2020) · cites this paper as Bunge, 1997
Cites
The role set: problems in sociological theory
Merton, R. K. (1957) · The British Journal of Sociology · doi:10.2307/587363 · Cited by 947 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation
Astbury, B., & Leeuw, F. L. (2010) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1098214010371972 · Cited by 850 · see citing works
Global value chains: A review of the multi-disciplinary literature
Kano, L., Tsang, E. W. K., & Yeung, H. W.-C. (2020) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-020-00304-2 · Cited by 767 · see citing works
Gerring, J. (2010) · Comparative Political Studies · doi:10.1177/0010414010376911 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
Selecting Appropriate Cases When Tracing Causal Mechanisms
Beach, D., & Pedersen, R. B. (2018) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124115622510 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
It's all about mechanisms – what process-tracing case studies should be tracing
Beach, D. (2016) · New Political Economy · doi:10.1080/13563467.2015.1134466 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Behavioral assumptions and theory development: the case of transaction cost economics
Tsang, E. W. K. (2006) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.553 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
“However, knowledge about detailed causal mechanisms that are operative in single cases cannot easily be exported to other cases because mechanisms are sensitive to even slight contextual differences (Bunge 1997; Falleti and Lynch 2009; Gerring 2010; Goertz and Mahoney 2009).”
Background
- Authors
- Bunge, M.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Bunge, Mario
- Venue
- Philosophy of the Social Sciences
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 410-465
- ISSN
- 0048-3931 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7441
- OpenAlex
- W2011680615
- Cited by
- 620
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 19.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Philosophy of the Social Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Realism in Sociology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy, Science, and History
- Keywords
- explanation, mechanisms, social mechanisms, covering law model, social explanation, functional relationships, rate equations
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
