Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:43:41.945Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection Bias and Social Science History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2020

Kris Inwood Open the ORCID record for Kris Inwood [Opens in a new window]  and
Hamish Maxwell-Stewart
Kris Inwood*
Affiliation:
Economics and History, University of Guelph
Hamish Maxwell-Stewart
Affiliation:
History, University of Tasmania
*
*Email: kinwood@uoguelph.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Historians and social scientists routinely, and inevitably, rely on sources that are unrepresentative of the past. The articles in this special issue of the journal illustrate the widespread prevalence of selection bias in historical sources, and the ways in which historians negotiate this challenge to reach useful conclusions from valuable, if imperfect sources.

Type
Special Issue Introduction
Information
Social Science History , Volume 44 , Special Issue 3: Selection Bias and Social Science History , Fall 2020 , pp. 411 - 416
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Social Science History Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cannadine, David (1984) “The present and the past in the English Industrial Revolution 1880–1980.” Past and Present (103): 131–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Raymond, and William, Thorpe (1992) “Power, punishment and penal labour: Convict workers and Moreton Bay.” Australian Historical Studies 25(98): 90–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, David Hackett (1971) Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Geddes, Barbara (1990) “How the cases you choose affect the answers you get: Selection bias in comparative politics.” Political Analysis (2): 131–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goody, Jack (2006) The Theft of History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maxwell-Stewart, Hamish (2016) “The state, convicts and longitudinal analysis.” Australian Historical Studies 47(3): 414–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCullagh, C. Behan (2000) “Bias in historical description, interpretation, and explanation.” History and Theory 39(1): 36–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novik, Peter (1988) That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakeshott, Michael (1962) Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays. New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
Putman, Lara (2016) “The transnational and the text-searchable: digitized sources and the shadows they cast.” American Historical Review 121(2): 377–402.Google Scholar
Said, Edward (1978) Orientalism. London: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Samarpwdra, Padmanabh (2011) “Census in colonial India and the birth of class.” Economic and Political Weekly 46(33): 51–8.Google Scholar
Stoler, Ann Laura (2008) Along the Archival Grain: Epistemic Anxieties and Colonial Common Sense. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Valle, Etienne (1974) The Female Population of France in the 19th Century: A Reconstruction of 82 Departments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Yetman, Norman R. (1984) “Ex-slave interviews and the historiography of slavery.” American Quarterly 36(2): 181–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar