Casualties of Causality

Description

This book offers a critique of the present status of the concept of causality in the social sciences. “The Causality Syndrome” consists of a belief in causal studies as more important than other studies, a narrow definition of causality, and rules of thumb regarding how to make causal claims. The book argues that the present dominance of this syndrome has considerable downsides and presents a challenge to social science. The book dissects the many interconnected ideas which undergird this syndrome and offers an intellectual home for advanced students, researchers and others who are concerned about the present dominance of The Causality Syndrome.  The book critically discusses whether “causality” deserves the central position in social science that its advocates desire. The text shows how methodological rules about causal inference are used to protect causal studies from critique, even in situations where these rules are not followed. It is argued that institutionalization of these rules as symbols of good and trustworthy social science is highly problematic and comes with a price. One of the casualties of causality is that there is less motivation to study complex and pressing issues in society which do not lend themselves to causal study designs.  The sections are short. The argument unfolds in a lively, engaged form with examples from many fields, including public health, evaluation and organizational studies. The case examples include classical experiments as well as contemporary research, e.g. studies of the effectiveness of restrictions targeting the spread of coronavirus. Acknowledgement Contents Chapter 1: The Causality Syndrome The Causality Syndrome Unpacked: System 1 and System 2 The Institutionalization of The Causality Syndrome Create More Space References Chapter 2: Twenty-five Questions Q1. Is Causality a Useful Concept in Social Science? Q2. Is Causation the Most Important and Honorable Task in the Social Sciences? Q3. Are All Great Social Scientists Famous for Their Causal Analysis? Q4. Is Causality Only One Thing? Q5. Can You Only Ask One Type of Question About Causality? Q6. Is Methodology Prior to Paradigms? Q7. Do Methodological Rules Precede Scientific Practice? Q8. Is Scientific Progress a Result of Compliance with Methodological Rules? Q9. Will Social Science Cleanse Itself of Ideology and Normativity, if it Restricts Itself to Causal Analysis? Q10. Does Causation Always Require a Counterfactual? Q11. If You Compare Two Groups, Is it then Less Important What the Comparison Is About? Q12. Does Reciprocal Causality Mean You Have Not Nailed Genuine Causality? Q13. Does the Quality of a Study Depend on Its Place in a Hierarchy of Evidence? Q14. Is the Randomized Controlled Trial a Clincher, and All Other Kinds of Studies Just Vouchers? Q15. Is a Study Better, the More Control You Have over the Situation? Q16. Will Causal Knowledge Accumulate Over Time? Q17. Does the Evidence Hierarchy Only Produce Knowledge? Q18. Are the Rules for Causal Inference the Same Regardless of the Practical Situation? Q19. Can You Sell Your Study by Pretending that Its Design Is Better than it Actually Is? Q20. Is Your Career in Jeopardy, if You Do Not Comply with The Causality Syndrome? Q21. Are People Primarily Interested in Outcomes? Q22. Do We Spend Most of Our Lives Thinking About the Causal Net Effect of X on Y? Q23. If We Focus on Demonstrable Social Impact, Will We then Maximize the Impact of Social Science? Q24. Are Methods Ways to Find Out About Things, But Not Ways to Influence Things? Q25. Is the Time Right for Causal Studies? References Chapter 3: Casualties of Causality and Paths to the Future Casualities of Causality Three Paths to the Future Final Word References Index