Contextual Analysis Revisited

[http://smr.sagepub.com.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/content/2/3/365.full.pdf+html Hauser, Robert M. 1974. “Contextual Analysis Revisited.” Sociological Methods & Research 2: 365-75]

Abstract
Hauser is responding to Farkas’ article that is pro-contextual analysis.

Hauser is anti-contextual analysis. He argues that there are five threats to validity in contextual analysis. "In any event a contextual analysis need not be taken seriously unless it has coped with all these sources of invalidity."
 * 1) the meaning of the effect
 * 2) the size of the effect
 * 3) omitted variables
 * 4) measurement error
 * 5) explicit selection on the dependent variable

Place in Literature
Hauser effectively shows the methodological shortcoming of contextual analysis. Four year after Hauser, Schelling effectively explains why individual behavior must be considered with an understanding of contextual effects. Eleven years after Hauser, Granovetter presents a strong theoretical justification for why individual actions are embedded in a dynamic social context.

It is unclear as to whether or not Hauser was or should have been aware of the these two justifications for contextual analysis. Nevertheless, Hauser narrowly focuses on issues in methodology and shows no concern or desire to advance quantitative methods for the sake of contextual analysis.