Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:17:20.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applying Quantitative Techniques to Quantitative History: Poverty and Federal Expenditures in Mexico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2022

Felix G. Boni  and
Mitchell A. Seligson
Felix G. Boni
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Mitchell A. Seligson
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In recent years there has been an upsurge in what has come to be called “quantitative history.” Despite the enthusiasm for this approach, however, some of its critics have validly claimed that its payoffs have all too often failed to live up to its promises of new and more accurate findings. Perhaps a central reason for this criticism is that although the quantitative historian may have been sufficiently thorough in collecting his data, he has often failed to apply to them the sensitive techniques of modern data analysis. Rather, he has continued to rely on more traditional methods of description such as means and percentages. As a result, quantitative works are often long on tables and short on analysis.

Type
Forum
Information
Latin American Research Review , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , Summer 1973 , pp. 105 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © 1973 by the University of Texas Press

Footnotes

*

Grateful acknowledgment is given to Professors Paul A. Beck, Raymond Corrado, James M. Malloy, Michael Margolis, Reid R. Reading, and Harold D. Sims of the University of Pittsburgh, and to Professor Peter H. Smith of the University of Wisconsin for their helpful comments on an earlier, unpublished version of this note.

References

Dye, Thomas 1966 Politics, Economics and the Public. Chicago.Google Scholar
Morrison, Denton E., and Henkel, Ramon E., eds. 1970 The Significance Test Controversy: A Reader. Chicago.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman, Bent, Dale H., and Hull, C. Hadlai 1970 SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. New York.Google Scholar
Rowney, Don Karl, and Graham, James Q. 1969 Quantitative History: Selected Readings in the Quantitative Analysis of Historical Data. Homewood, Illinois.Google Scholar
Rummel, Rudolph 1967 “Understanding Factor Analysis.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. 11: 444–480. 1970 Applied Factor Analysis. Evanston, Illinois.Google Scholar
Skidmore, Thomas E., and Smith, Peter H. 1970 “Notes on Quantitative History: Federal Expenditure and Social Change in Mexico since 1910.” Latin American Research Review. 5: 1: 71–85.Google Scholar
Unikel, Luis, and Victoria, Edmundo 1970 “Medicion de algunos aspectos del desarrollo socioeconomico de las entidades federativas de Mexico, 1940-1960.” Demografla y Economla. 4: 292–361.Google Scholar
Wilkie, James W. 1970 The Mexican Revolution: Federal Expenditure and Social Change since 1910. Berkeley.Google Scholar