How to study the past using data Quantitative Analysis for Historical Social Science advances historical research in the social sciences by bridging the divide between qualitative and quantitative analysis. Gregory Wawro and Ira Katznelson argue for an expansion of the standard quantitative methodological toolkit with a set of innovative approaches that better capture nuances missed by more commonly used statistical methods. Demonstrating how to employ such promising tools, Wawro and Katznelson address the criticisms made by prominent historians and historically oriented social scientists regarding the shortcomings of mainstream quantitative approaches for studying the past. Traditional statistical methods have been inadequate in addressing temporality, periodicity, specificity, and context-features central to good historical analysis. To address these shortcomings, Wawro and Katznelson argue for the application of alternative approaches that are particularly well-suited to incorporating these features in empirical investigations. The authors demonstrate the advantages of these techniques with replications of research that locate structural breaks and uncover temporal evolution. They develop new practices for testing claims about path dependence in time-series data, and they discuss the promise and perils of using historical approaches to enhance causal inference. Opening a dialogue among traditional qualitative scholars and applied quantitative social scientists focusing on history, Quantitative Analysis for Historical Social Science illustrates powerful ways to move historical social science research forward.

How to study the past using data Quantitative Analysis for Historical Social Science advances historical research in the social sciences by bridging the divide between qualitative and quantitative analysis. Gregory Wawro and Ira Katznelson argue for an expansion of the standard quantitative methodological toolkit with a set of innovative approaches that better capture nuances missed by more commonly used statistical methods. Demonstrating how to employ such promising tools, Wawro and Katznelson address the criticisms made by prominent historians and historically oriented social scientists regarding the shortcomings of mainstream quantitative approaches for studying the past. Traditional statistical methods have been inadequate in addressing temporality, periodicity, specificity, and context-features central to good historical analysis. To address these shortcomings, Wawro and Katznelson argue for the application of alternative approaches that are particularly well-suited to incorporating these features in empirical investigations. The authors demonstrate the advantages of these techniques with replications of research that locate structural breaks and uncover temporal evolution. They develop new practices for testing claims about path dependence in time-series data, and they discuss the promise and perils of using historical approaches to enhance causal inference. Opening a dialogue among traditional qualitative scholars and applied quantitative social scientists focusing on history, Quantitative Analysis for Historical Social Science illustrates powerful ways to move historical social science research forward.

"By combining rational choice and historical institutional approaches, Wawro and Schickler have succeeded in framing the filibuster's vices--and its virtues--in new and often surprising ways. In the process, they have significantly advanced our understanding of the relationship between norms and rules, practice and structure, and individuals and institutions. "Filibuster" is one of the very best analytical studies of the U.S. Senate ever written."--Richard Bensel, Cornell University

"Wawro and Schickler deliver new insights into legislative delay and obstruction that is particular to the U.S. Senate. The book is an exemplar of modern legislative analysis that deftly blends history, formal theory, and statistical analysis to sharpen our understanding of the filibuster, both before and after the passage of Rule XXI. Practitioners and students of public policy will find plenty of original evidence about the role of the filibuster in shaping national policy. Students of legislative behavior will find a model of how to meld formal and qualitative analysis of institutional politics."--Charles Stewart, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

"The authors employ an impressive mix of quantitative and qualitative evidence and the statistical analysis is state-of-the-art. The book makes a set of arguments that help to clarify the role of the Senate in American political development."--Nolan McCarty, Princeton University

"The history of the Senate has rarely before been illustrated with the amount of evidence and perspective that these two authors bring to this work. We learn a great deal about why the Senate remains so resistant to change and to limiting debate."--Wendy Schiller, BrownUniversity