Frozen history : limitations and possibilities of quantitative diffusion studies

In this contribution I have tried to show how quantitative methods can generate new questions and thus support historical research. It can be concluded that re ducing historical complexity through forcing reality into the shape of a diffusion curve does not seem to be the preferable strategy for developing new concepts — which happens to be a major concern of this volume. In this case it is impor tant first to describe and analyze the very complexity of developments, context, and patterns, using quantitative data as indicators. Only at a later stage it will be productive to link up qualitative and quantitative approaches, a coupling which promises to be all the more productive as the product in question is technologi cally more complex (and, hence, its use is more multi-layered). In the latter case, quantitative research may appear to be very productive, and should be carried out before, or at least parallel to, qualitative research. Quantitative research, however, should not replace historical explanation. This is true in particular regarding styl ized diffusion curves, because these curves themselves are in need of explanation. People and their reflective representatives are the real ‘drivers’ of such curves, and it is their choice behavior, including the motives behind it, that constitutes the ultimate phenomenon to be explained.