The social scientific study of revolution has been deviled by a lack of progress in recent years, divided between competing views on the universality of patterns in revolution. This study examines the origins of these epistemologies. Drawing on an insight that different modes of comparison yield different types of knowledge, I argue that the network structure of how cases are compared constrains or enables the development of a field’s theoretical sensibilities. Analysis of comparative studies of revolution published from 1970 to 2009 reveals that the field overall is most amenable to knowledge about particular cases rather than the phenomenon of revolution broadly. Analysis of the changing structure of comparison over time reveals that comparison precedes the development of an epistemology. The results suggest that conclusions about the possibility, or lack thereof, of generalization may be an artifact of the comparative method.

中文翻译：

---

革命研究中的比较结构

近年来，对革命的社会科学研究因缺乏进展而受到谴责，在对革命模式的普遍性的不同观点之间存在分歧。这项研究检查了这些认识论的起源。基于不同比较模式产生不同类型知识的见解，我认为比较案例的网络结构限制或促进了领域理论敏感性的发展。对1970年至2009年发表的革命比较研究的分析表明，整个领域最适合特定案例的知识，而不是广义上的革命现象。对比较随时间变化的结构的分析表明，比较是在认识论发展之前。