Nomadic Concepts, Variable Choice, and the Social Sciences

The observation that concepts used by social scientists are often problematic is not new; they have been described as Ballung concepts, cluster concepts, essentially contested, and reflexive; however, the need to work with these concepts remains. This article addresses the problem of variable choice...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Philosophy of the social sciences 2020-01, Vol.50 (1), p.3-22
Main Author: Greene, Catherine
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Concepts
Nomads
Social sciences
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73
container_end_page 22
container_issue 1
container_start_page 3
container_title Philosophy of the social sciences
container_volume 50
creator Greene, Catherine
description The observation that concepts used by social scientists are often problematic is not new; they have been described as Ballung concepts, cluster concepts, essentially contested, and reflexive; however, the need to work with these concepts remains. This article addresses the problem of variable choice in the social sciences by exploring and extending Woodward’s recommendations. This article demonstrates why Woodward’s criteria are difficult to apply in the social sciences and proposes an alternative, but complementary, framework for assessing variables.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0048393119878783
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2324877659</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0048393119878783</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2324877659</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1Lw0AQxRdRsFbvHhe8Nrof2Y94k2BVKHqoeg2T6cSmtN26mx78702JIAgyh3d4v_cGHmOXUlxL6dyNELnXhZay8K4_fcRG0hiVuTyXx2x0sLODf8rOUloJIZU1dsRun8MGFi3yMmyRdl2a8HeILdRr4uUytEgTDtsF75bE5wFbWPM5ttSz6ZydNLBOdPGjY_Y2vX8tH7PZy8NTeTfLUBvZZRqkcbVxBpWrrS4sNoACwRM2StbaKiHIYe1BKPTWkleEHq0XOekCnB6zq6F3F8PnnlJXrcI-bvuXldIq985ZU_SUGCiMIaVITbWL7QbiVyVFdVio-rtQH8mGSIIP-i39l_8GdjtjVg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2324877659</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Nomadic Concepts, Variable Choice, and the Social Sciences</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>SAGE</source><creator>Greene, Catherine</creator><creatorcontrib>Greene, Catherine</creatorcontrib><description>The observation that concepts used by social scientists are often problematic is not new; they have been described as Ballung concepts, cluster concepts, essentially contested, and reflexive; however, the need to work with these concepts remains. This article addresses the problem of variable choice in the social sciences by exploring and extending Woodward’s recommendations. This article demonstrates why Woodward’s criteria are difficult to apply in the social sciences and proposes an alternative, but complementary, framework for assessing variables.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0048-3931</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7441</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0048393119878783</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Concepts ; Nomads ; Social sciences</subject><ispartof>Philosophy of the social sciences, 2020-01, Vol.50 (1), p.3-22</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9425-2000</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923,33221,33772,79134</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Greene, Catherine</creatorcontrib><title>Nomadic Concepts, Variable Choice, and the Social Sciences</title><title>Philosophy of the social sciences</title><description>The observation that concepts used by social scientists are often problematic is not new; they have been described as Ballung concepts, cluster concepts, essentially contested, and reflexive; however, the need to work with these concepts remains. This article addresses the problem of variable choice in the social sciences by exploring and extending Woodward’s recommendations. This article demonstrates why Woodward’s criteria are difficult to apply in the social sciences and proposes an alternative, but complementary, framework for assessing variables.</description><subject>Concepts</subject><subject>Nomads</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><issn>0048-3931</issn><issn>1552-7441</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1Lw0AQxRdRsFbvHhe8Nrof2Y94k2BVKHqoeg2T6cSmtN26mx78702JIAgyh3d4v_cGHmOXUlxL6dyNELnXhZay8K4_fcRG0hiVuTyXx2x0sLODf8rOUloJIZU1dsRun8MGFi3yMmyRdl2a8HeILdRr4uUytEgTDtsF75bE5wFbWPM5ttSz6ZydNLBOdPGjY_Y2vX8tH7PZy8NTeTfLUBvZZRqkcbVxBpWrrS4sNoACwRM2StbaKiHIYe1BKPTWkleEHq0XOekCnB6zq6F3F8PnnlJXrcI-bvuXldIq985ZU_SUGCiMIaVITbWL7QbiVyVFdVio-rtQH8mGSIIP-i39l_8GdjtjVg</recordid><startdate>202001</startdate><enddate>202001</enddate><creator>Greene, Catherine</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9425-2000</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202001</creationdate><title>Nomadic Concepts, Variable Choice, and the Social Sciences</title><author>Greene, Catherine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Concepts</topic><topic>Nomads</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Greene, Catherine</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Philosophy of the social sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Greene, Catherine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Nomadic Concepts, Variable Choice, and the Social Sciences</atitle><jtitle>Philosophy of the social sciences</jtitle><date>2020-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>3</spage><epage>22</epage><pages>3-22</pages><issn>0048-3931</issn><eissn>1552-7441</eissn><abstract>The observation that concepts used by social scientists are often problematic is not new; they have been described as Ballung concepts, cluster concepts, essentially contested, and reflexive; however, the need to work with these concepts remains. This article addresses the problem of variable choice in the social sciences by exploring and extending Woodward’s recommendations. This article demonstrates why Woodward’s criteria are difficult to apply in the social sciences and proposes an alternative, but complementary, framework for assessing variables.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0048393119878783</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9425-2000</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0048-3931
ispartof Philosophy of the social sciences, 2020-01, Vol.50 (1), p.3-22
issn 0048-3931
1552-7441
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2324877659
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Sociological Abstracts; SAGE
subjects Concepts
Nomads
Social sciences
title Nomadic Concepts, Variable Choice, and the Social Sciences
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T01%3A43%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Nomadic%20Concepts,%20Variable%20Choice,%20and%20the%20Social%20Sciences&rft.jtitle=Philosophy%20of%20the%20social%20sciences&rft.au=Greene,%20Catherine&rft.date=2020-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=3&rft.epage=22&rft.pages=3-22&rft.issn=0048-3931&rft.eissn=1552-7441&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0048393119878783&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2324877659%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-3a157b575c27b6396cfac0ca8ecf21b36200e7cb8a02c866e82ec8c6804e39a73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2324877659&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0048393119878783&rfr_iscdi=true