This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Martin, A. D. Articles by Quinn, K. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

USING COMPUTATIONAL METHODS TO PERFORM COUNTERFACTUAL ANALYSES OF FORMAL THEORIES

Kevin M. Quinn

Recently there has been an increase in the number of researchers who use rational choice models to explain single cases and rare events. Because of the small number of cases under study, these researchers must rely either explicitly or implicitly on counterfactual reasoning. This paper argues that computational methods provide a profitable means of carrying out rigorous counterfactual analysis. The authors advocate robustness analysis as one important part of the counterfactual analysis of formal theories. Specifically, they evaluate the robustness of the behavioral assumptions of two formal models using various heuristic search algorithms and Markov chains. They find that Kuran's (1989) threshold model of mass protest and Ingberman's (1985) model of direct-democracy referenda are robust to perturbations in their behavioral assumptions. These findings increase the plausibility of causal claims made by scholars who use these models to explain specific events.

Key Words: counterfactuals • discrete optimization • genetic algorithms • robustness

Rationality and Society, Vol. 8, No. 3, 295-323 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/104346396008003004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?