Abstract
In this essay, I first reflect on the notion of epistemic causality which, according to Shan and Williamson, complements the idea of evidential pluralism. Then, I shift my attention to mixed methods research. While I agree that evidential pluralism provides a strong philosophical foundation for this approach, I argue that there is an alternative, equally strong foundation that focuses on explanation rather than on evidence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
There are no data associated with this article.
Notes
I have selected ‘philosophical’ quotes on the importance of knowledge of causal mechanisms. There is also an extensive ‘practical’ literature on mixed methods research, focusing on how it should be done. See, e.g. The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry (Hesse-Biber & Johnson, 2015) and The Routledge Handbook for Advancing Integration in Mixed Methods Research (Hitchcock & Onwuegbuzie, 2022).
This does not entail that lung cancer cannot cause smoking (e.g. by means of forward-operating psychological mechanisms that makes people diagnosed with lung cancer to smoke more — for instance because they don’t care anymore about health — after the diagnosis). However, in order to argue for this, you have to design a different study.
References
De Bal, I., & Weber, E. (2019). Causation, time asymmetry and mechanistic evidence in the social sciences. In S. Kleinberg (Ed.), Time and causality across the sciences (pp. 138–157). Cambridge University Press.
Fearon, J., & Laitin, D. (2008). Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. In J. Box-Steffensmeier, H. Brady, & D. Collier (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political methodology (pp. 756–776). Oxford University Press.
Gerring, J. (2010) ‘Causal mechanisms: Yes, but …’, in Comparative Political Studies 43, 1499-1526
Giere, R. (1997). Understanding scientific reasoning (4th ed.). Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Goertz, G. (2017). Multimethod research, causal mechanisms and case studies. Princeton University Press.
Hesse-Biber, S., & Johnson, B. (eds.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. Oxford University Press
Hitchcock, J., & Onwuegbuzie, A., (eds.). (2022). The Routledge handbook for advancing integration in mixed methods research. Routledge
Lewis, D. K. (1973). Causation. Journal of Philosophy, 70, 556–567.
Menzies, P., & Price, H. (1993). Causation as a secondary quality. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 44, 187–203.
Rohlfing, I., & Schneider, C. (2018). A unifying framework for causal analysis in set-theoretic multimethod research. Sociological Methods & Research, 47, 37–63.
Russo, F., & Williamson, J. (2007). Interpreting causality in the health sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 21, 157–170.
Shan, Y., & Williamson, J. (2023). Evidential pluralism in social sciences. Routledge.
Steel, D. (2004). Social mechanisms and causal inference. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34, 55–78.
Weber, E. (2024). Causal mechanisms in the social sciences as evidence for higher-order causal relations. In P. Illari & F. Russo (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of causality and causal methods (pp. 454–466). Routledge.
Williamson, J. (2009). Probabilistic theories. In H. Beebee, C. Hitchcock, & P. Menzies (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Causation (pp. 185–212). Oxford University Press.
Woodward, J. (2003). Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation. Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Weber, E. Evidential pluralism, epistemic causality and mixed methods research. Asian J. Philos. 4, 39 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44204-025-00263-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44204-025-00263-1