Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T12:51:32.477Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Statisticians and Political Scientists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Harold F. Gosnell
Harold F. Gosnell
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his classic book, Human Nature in Politics, published in 1908, Graham Wallas said: “We must aim at finding as many relevant and measurable facts about human nature as possible, and we must attempt to make all of them serviceable in political reasoning.” While the point of view which Wallas expressed at that time has by no means been universally accepted, and is today challenged by men like Charles A. Beard, certain steps have been taken toward its recognition.

Wallas was particularly impressed by the successful use of quantitative methods made by the economists, and well he might be. To mention a single case, the work of F. Y. Edgeworth, in the measurement of utility, the algebraical or diagrammatic determination of economic equilibriums, and the application of the theory of probability to sampling and in the measurement of economic value or index numbers, showed the trend of the times in economics. The twentieth century has marked an acceleration of this trend. Political scientists have not only lagged far behind the economists in the use of statistics, but they have shown important resistance in some sections to following in this general direction. What is the explanation of this situation?

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , June 1933 , pp. 392 - 403
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1933

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

1 Page 140.

2 Appearing under the title, “Political Science,” Chap, IX in Gee, W. (ed.), Research in the Social Sciences (New York, 1929)Google Scholar. See also Gooch, R. K., “Government as an Exact Science,” Southwestern Political and Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 9, pp. 252–263 (December, 1928)Google Scholar.

3 A Study of the Principles of Politics (New York, 1930)Google Scholar.

4 Elliott, W. Y., in Rice, S. (ed.), Methods in Social Science (Chicago, 1931), pp. 84–85Google Scholar.

5 The Statistical Method in Economics and Political Science (New York, 1929)Google Scholar.

6 Quantitative Methods in Politics (New York, 1928)Google Scholar.

7 The Identification of Attribute-Cluster-Blocs (Chicago, 1931)Google Scholar.

8 In discussing this paper, Professor F. Stuart Chapin contended that measurement should be carefully distinguished from enumeration. Measurement involves the selection of an arbitrary scale, while enumeration is nothing more than counting. According to Graham Wallas, social scientists are not likely to discover a new physical unit like the ampere or wave length. In this paper, the word “measurement” is not used in the sense in which it is employed in the physical sciences. Measurement here means making the most exact, objective, clear, appropriate, and comparable observations possible. The whole question of units has been well discussed by Lundberg, G. A., in his Social Research (New York, 1929)Google Scholar.

9 Maynard, D., “Fraud and Error in Chicago Referendum Returns,” National Municipal Review, Vol. 19, p. 164 (1930)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 On this point, see Young, D., “Statistical Studies of Race Relations,” in Rice, S. A. (ed.), Statistics in Social Studies (Philadelphia, 1930)Google Scholar, Chap. v.

11 “The Influence of Party upon Legislation in England and America,” Annual Report of American Historical Association, Vol. 1, pp. 431–542 (1901)Google Scholar.

12 Farmers and Workers in American Politics (New York, 1924)Google Scholar.

13 Quantitative Methods in Politics.

14 “Multiple Factor Analysis,” Psychological Review, Vol. 38, pp. 406–427 (September, 1931)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “A Multiple Factor Study of Vocational Interests,” Personnel Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 198–205 (October, 1931)Google Scholar. Tetrachoric r is discussed by Kelley, T. L., Statistical Method (New York, 1924), p. 253Google Scholar.

15 “Miscellaneous Applications of the Calculus of Probabilities,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. 61, pp. 534–544 (September, 1898)Google Scholar.

16 Ogburn, F. and Peterson, Delvin, ‘Political Thought of Social Classes,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 31, pp. 300–317 (June, 1916)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Quantitative Methods in Politics, pp. 94, 198.

18 Political Parties of Today (New York, 1924)Google Scholar.

19 Compulsory Voting and Absent Voting, with Bibliographies (Ohio Legislative Reference Department Bulletin, No. 1, Columbus, (1914)Google Scholar.

20 Merriam, C. E. and Gosnell, H. F., Non-Voting: Causes and Methods of Control (Chicago, 1924)Google Scholar; Gosnell, H. F., Getting Out the Vote (Chicago, 1927)Google Scholar.

21 Arneson, B., “Non-Voting in a Typical Ohio Community,” in this Review, Vol. 19, pp. 816–825 (November, 1925)Google Scholar.

22 “The Composition of Political Attitudes,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 35, pp. 220–238 (September, 1929)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The conclusion of this study is that political behavior is not specific, but is related to inclusive sets or attitudes in personality. The political character of men is, on the whole, bound up with many generic traits in their personalities.

23 Thurstone, L. L. and Chave, E. J., The Measurement of Attitude, etc. (University of Chicago Press, 1929)Google Scholar. See Vetter, G. B., “The Study of Social and Political Opinions,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 26–39 (April, 1930)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and G. and Murphy, L. B., Experimental Social Psychology (New York, 1931)Google Scholar, for a review of the literature on this subject.

24 Beyle, H., “A Scale for the Measurement of Attitude Toward Candidates for Elective Governmental Office” in this Review, Vol. 26, p. 527 (June, 1932)Google Scholar.

25 Regarding the statistical analysis of newspaper and periodical material, see Woodward, J. L., Foreign News in American Newspapers (New York, 1930)Google Scholar; Hart, Hornell, “Changing Social Attitudes and Interests,” in Recent Social Trends (New York, 1933)Google Scholar; and Foster, S., American News of Europe, 1914–1917 (University of Chicago Ph.D. thesis, 1932)Google Scholar.

26 American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 18, pp. 222–240 (September, 1912)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Quantitative Methods in Politics. See also Fletcher, M. and Fletcher, M., “The Frequency Distribution of Voting in St. Louis,” Social Forces, Vol. 8, pp. 427–429 (March, 1930)Google Scholar.

28 “Three Distinctions in the Study of Leadership,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 33, No. 2 (July-September, 1928)Google Scholar.

29 Huntington, E. V., “A New Method of Apportionment of Representatives,” Publications of American Statistical Association, 1921, pp. 859 ff.Google Scholar; “Methods of Apportionment in Congress,” in this Review, Vol. 25, pp. 961–965 (November, 1931)Google Scholar. The method of major fractions uses a form of the arithmetic mean and the method of equal proportions a form of the geometric mean.

30 Cited in Florence, op. cit., pp. 114–115.

31 Siegfried, A., Tableau Politique de la France de l'Ouest (Paris, 1913)Google Scholar; Holcombe, A. N., Political Parties of Today (New York, 1924)Google Scholar; Gosnell, H. F., Why Europe Votes (Chicago, 1930)Google Scholar.

32 Quantitative Methods in Politics, pp. 280–293.

33 American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 36, pp. 596–606 (January, 1931)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 “Voting in California Cities, 1900–1925,” Southwestern Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 4 (March, 1928)Google Scholar; “Rural Voting in California, 1900–1926,” ibid., Vol. 9, No. 2 (September, 1928); “Voting in California, 1900–1926,” ibid., Vol. 10, No. 1 (June, 1929).

35 Wooddy, C. H. and Stouffer, S. A., “Local Option and Public Opinion,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 36, pp. 176–205 (September, 1930)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Rice, Quantitative Methods in Politics Chap. XXI.

37 Ogburn, W. F. and Goltra, Iness, “How Women Vote,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 34, pp. 413–433, (September, 1919)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Ogburn, W. F. and Talbot, Nell Snow, “A Measurement of the Factors in the Presidential Election of 1928,” Social Forces, Vol. 8, pp. 175–183 (December, 1929)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Neprash, J. A., The Brookhart Campaigns in Iowa, 1920–1926 (New York, Columbia University Press, 1932)Google Scholar.

39 Wooddy, C. H., The Case of Frank L. Smith (Chicago, 1931)Google Scholar, Appendix V, “Statistical Studies of Illinois Elections.”

40 Mr. Max White.

41 University of Chicago Ph.D. thesis, 1927.

42 For maps of presidential elections, see Paullin, C. O., Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States (Washington and New York, 1932)Google Scholar. Some use of maps is made in my Why Europe Votes (Chicago, 1930)Google Scholar.

43 Lundberg, op. cit., Chaps, X-XI.

44 Robinson, Claude E., Straw Votes; A Study of Political Prediction (New York, Columbia University Press, 1932)Google Scholar. See also Robinson's preliminary analysis of the 1932 returns of the Literary Digest and Hearst polls in the New York Times, October 16, 1932, section 8.

45 Thurstone, L. L., “Influence of Motion Pictures on Children's Attitudes,” Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 2, pp. 291–305 (August, 1931)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.