What’s old is new, and new is old: History and geography’s quantitative revolutions
Dialogues in Human GeographyPublished 1 March 2014
Trevor J. Barnes
Citations9
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score1.18
SNIP1.58
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
Abstract
The article provides a critical commentary on papers by Ron Johnston et al. (2014) and Elvin Wyly (2014) about the different forms of geography’s quantitative revolution. The paper argues that in both cases the respective authors should have striven for a more robust historical exploration.
Keywords
Social SciencesEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
Economic GeographyA Computer Movie Simulating Urban Growth in the Detroit Region
9,591 Citations1970Waldo Tobler
The Foucault Reader
2,848 Citations1984Michel Foucault, Paul Rabinow
Geographical ReviewA New Map of the Surface of Population Potentials for the United States, 1960
44 Citations1964William Warntz
Dialogues in Human GeographyMutual misunderstanding and avoidance, misrepresentations and disciplinary politics: spatial science and quantitative analysis in (United Kingdom) geographical curricula
34 Citations2014Ron Johnston, Richard Harris +4 more
Annals of the Association of American GeographersNewton, The Newtonians, and the<i>Geographia Generalis Varenii</i>∗
26 Citations1989William Warntz
Geographical ReviewGeographers: Biobibliographical Studies, 1977-2000
10 Citations2000Patrick Armstrong, Geoffrey J. Martin
