Research Design in Political Science

Course Organization

 

Professor: 
Liliana Andonova
liliana.andonova@graduateinstitute.ch
+41 22 908 59 43
Office hours:
Tuesdays 12:00-14:00
(Rigot 30)
 

Assistant: 
Assia Alexieva
assia.alexieva@graduateinstitute.ch
+41 22 908 59 48
Office hours:
Tuesdays 14:30-16:30
(Rigot 35)
 

Course Description

This course is a survey of basic topics and methods in political science research. Through readings, lectures, and assignments, the objectives of the course are to give students an introduction to the research skills involved in political analysis and to aid them in developing a research design for individual research projects. Students will achieve a solid understanding of the fundamental logic of social science research, but will not achieve proficiency in any specific research method. Topics for the course include basic questions of the philosophy of social science, the role of theories, the identification of research questions, case selection, data collection and measurement, and a discussion of a few specific methods and techniques. The readings are a mix of practical guides, discussions of research issues, and examples of the use of various research methods.

 

Syllabus

The course provides a survey of basic topics and methods in political science research. It is aimed primarily at first-year MIS students in political science. The objectives of the course are to give students an introduction to the research skills involved in political analysis through readings, lectures, and assignments and to aid them in developing a research design for individual research projects.

Topics for the course include basic questions of the philosophy of social science, the role of theories, the identification of research questions, hypotheses formulation and testing, case selection, data collection and measurement. Several specific research methods and techniques will be examined. The readings are a mix of practical guides, discussions of research issues, and examples of the use of various research methods. Students will also prepare a research design paper which should help them structure and conduct the research and analysis of their graduate memoire.

 

Readings:
Students should purchase the following book: Gary King, Robert Keohane and Sydney Verba, Designing Social Inquiry, (Princeton, 1994).

The rest of the required readings are included in a reading packet available for purchase at Imprimerie Minute. Additional reading material may be posted on the website of the course (instructor will notify when this is the case).

In order to prepare assignments and to participate in class discussions, students must read the required readings prior to class. Occasional, unannounced tests may be implemented in class to assess the level of understanding of key concepts from the readings.

 

Evaluation:
Class participation: 15%
One group assignment: 15%
Individual assignments
 Research question: 5%
 Concept definition and data presentation: 10%
 Case selection: 15%
Research design paper due May 26: 40%

 

Research Design Paper (10-15 double spaced pages)
Each student must complete a research design for his or her graduate mémoire. The paper is due on May 26, 2009 and is worth 40% of the course grade.
The research design should include:
1. Presentation, discussion, & justification of research question
2. Review of relevant literature
3. Presentation and discussion of specific hypotheses or arguments, and alternative explanations
4. Discussion of data selection and methodology
5. Discussion of measurement issues

Group Assignments
On the first day of class, students will have to sign up for one group assignment.  Depending on the class size, groups will comprise of 3-4 students roughly.  The assignments consist for two components. Each student has to submit an individual discussion paper on the selected reading, and together with the group prepare a panel discussion for the respective class session of the selected reading(s).

Individual and group assignments are due, either in hard copy form or as a Word/pdf attachment, to Assia Alexieva, no later than 10.00 on the day of class.

 

Class Schedule

February 17: Introduction

February 24:  Explanations in Social Science

• Gary King, Robert Keohane and Sydney Verba, Designing Social Inquiry, (Princeton, 1994). Chap. 1, ch. 2 (p. 34-49), ch. 3, p. 75-91.
• Klotz, Audie and Cecilia Lynch. 2007. Strategies for Research in Constructivist International Relations. (M.E. Sharpe), ch. 1 “Constructivism,” pp. 3-23.

Group assignment 1: Prepare a 2-3 page paper and a panel discussion on one or two research article(s) (or books if you have a favorite one) of your choice that you believe provides a convincing causal explanation. What question did the author pose, what alternative explanations were considered, what method was used, and what made the explanation convincing? Please distribute the article (or an illustrative chapter of the book) to the TA and the class list at least 3 days before the class meetings. All students are required to read at least 1 of the articles suggested by their colleagues and engage in the discussion.
Note: A list of possible readings will be available on the course webpage.

March 3: Research Question

• Zinnes, Dina A. 1980. Three Puzzles in Search of a Researcher. International Studies Quarterly 24 (September): 315-342.
• Geddes, Barbara. 2003. Paradigms and Sandcastles. Ch. 2, p.27-47.  The University of Michigan Press.

Individual assignment 1: State the research question for your research design paper (1 page). The research question must imply a causal relationship(s) that can be examined through feasible research. The paper should also include one paragraph on what makes the question puzzling, interesting or significant. At least 5 citations of relevant academic literature should be included (web sites are not considered academic literature, but if they contain information critical to the question posed can be included in addition to the 5 academic citations).

March 10: Model Building

• Gary King, Robert Keohane and Sydney Verba, Designing Social Inquiry, (Princeton, 1994). Ch. 3, p. 91-114 and chapter 4
• Rogowski, Ronald. How Inference In the Social (but Not the Physical) Sciences Neglects Theoretical Anomaly. 2004. In Brady, H.E. and Collier, D. Rethinking Social Inquiry. Rowman and Littlefield, p. 75-83

Visit by a librarian to introduce databases, search engines, archival sources available through the IHEID or affiliated libraries and institutions. 

March: 17:  Case studies and the comparative method

• King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O. and Verba, Sidney 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press, Ch. 6
• Lijphart, Arend. 1971. Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method. APSR, 65: 682-693.
• Alexander L. George and Andrew Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. (MIT Press). Ch. 3 and Ch. 4.

Group assignment 2: Discuss (in 2-3 pages) and prepare a panel discussion on an article or a book that employs a case study or comparative case studies method to test a theory. How did the author choose the unit of analysis (country, industry, village, organization, etc)? What is the dimension of variation and comparison? On what basis did the author select the specific cases? Do you believe these are the right criteria? Did the author avoid selection bias? Are any variables held constant?  How effective is the case selection? Are the results generalizable and convincing? Please distribute the article(s) (or an illustrative chapter of the book) to the TA and the class list at least 3 days before the class meetings. All students are required to read at least 1 of the articles suggested by their colleagues and engage in the discussion. 

 

March 24: Measurement and data presentation

• King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O. and Verba, Sidney 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. (Princeton: Princeton University Press), Ch. 5, 150-168
• Geddes, Barbara 1990. Paradigms and Sand Castles. Ch. 3 (How the Cases you Choose Affect the Answers you Get), 89-114
• Sartori, Giovanni. 1991. Comparing and Miscomparing.  Journal of Theoretical Politics 3:3: 243-257.
• De Soysa, Indra and Neumayer, Eric. 2005. False Prophet, or Genuine Savior? Assessing the Effects of Economic Openness on Sustainable Development, 1980-99. International Organization, Summer 2005, Vol. 59 Issue 3, p.731-772
• Levy, M. 2002.  “Measuring Nations’ Environmental Sustainability.”  Environmental Performance Measurement: The Global Report 2001-2002.
• Andonova, L. 2003. Transnational Politics of the Environment. The EU and Environmental Policy in Central and Eastern Europe. (MIT Press). Ch. 2 Chemical Safety Policies.

Group Assignment 3: Discuss (in 2-3 pages) and prepare a panel discussion on the readings by De Soysa and Neumayer, Levy, and Andonova. How did each reading define the concept of environmental policy or environmental sustainability? How is environmental sustainability measured? What determined the choice of measures? What are the sources of data? What are the advantages or disadvantages of each measure? Can these measures be improved? Are the measures presented across the three readings compatible? Does the conceptualization and measurement of environmental sustainability influence the results of the studies?
 

March 31: Student presentations: Concepts, operationalization and data sources

Individual assignment 2: Concept definitions and measurement

Please prepare a short presentation with the following components:

• Definition of one of the concepts central to your research proposal (or one of the concepts listed below). Discuss what is included and what is excluded in the definition? Does the definition lend itself to empirical use, data collection and measurement?
• Propose one or multiple measurement of the concept. What units of analysis are implied by this (these) measurement(s)? What are the advantages and disadvantages of these types of measurement?
• Provide data to illustrate this(these) concept(s), using tabular as well as graphical format to represent variation in which you are interested.
• Discuss the relevance of this concept and measurement to your research design.

Concepts: war, civil war, peacekeeping, civil society, development, trade, foreign aid, democracy, ethnicity, hegemony, institutions, peace, cooperation (environmental, trade, human rights, etc), compliance, human rights, advocacy networks, epistemic communities, legitimacy, state capacity, corruption, social capital, terrorism, governance, transgovernmental networks, values, interests.

April 7: Student presentations

Individual assignment 3: Presentation and justification of case selection or statistical model

April 14: No class

April 21: Analysis and validity

• King, Gary, Keohane, Robert O. and Verba, Sidney 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. (Princeton: Princeton University Press) 168-199 (omitted variable bias, inefficiency, endogeneity)
• Fearon, James D. 1991. Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science. World Politics 43 (January): 169-95.
• George, A.L. and A. Bennett. 2003. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Chapter 9.

April 28: Content analysis

• Klotz, Audie and Cecilia Lynch. 2007. Strategies for Research in Constructivist International Relations. (M.E. Sharpe), ch. 5 “Interests,” p. 86-104.
• Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analyzing Discourse. Ch. 7, 123-133.
• Laver, Michael and John Garry 2000. Estimating Policy Positions from Political Texts, American Journal of Political Science: 619-634.
• Risse, Thomas. 2000. “Let’s Argue! Communicative Action in World Politics,” International Organization 54:1, 1-39.
• Schimmelfennig, Frank. 2001. The Community Trap: Liberal Norms, Rhetorical Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 1, (Winter, 2001), pp. 47-80

Group assignment 4: Discuss (in 2-3 pages) and prepare a panel discussion on the readings by Risse and Schimmelfennig. What concepts and methods did the authors use to advance their arguments? How are the concepts operationalized? What research design and combination of methods were used to provide support for the argument? Do the arguments address validity and congruence considerations? Is the data compatible with alternative arguments? What is your assessment of the effectiveness of research design and evidence used in each article?  
 

May 5: Survey Research and Political Interviewing

• Box-Steffensmeir, J.M., H. E. Brady, and D. Collier. The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. (Oxford University Press). Ch. 16 and ch. 29.
• Ronald Inglehart. 1999. Globalization and Postmodern Values. The Washington Quarterly, 23:1 pp. 215–228.
• The World Values Survey website, http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/ Please review the website and prepare for discussion of survey, its results, and possible uses in social science research. Students are also welcome to make presentation of other survey data that they find particularly interesting or important.
• Recommended: Brady, Henry E. 2000. Contributions of Survey Research to Political Science, PS: Political Science and Politics 33 (March): 47-57.

Group assignment 5: Discuss (in 2-3 pages) and prepare a panel discussion on an article or a book that employs survey data (several articles in addition to Inglehart (1999) will be suggested on the website of the course). Is the survey data employed in the study publically available? Are the survey instruments available? What is the sample size and duration of the survey? What are the advantages or disadvantages of this method of research and using survey data for political analysis? Could you propose using the same survey data to examine a different question? Please distribute the article(s) (or an illustrative chapter of the book) to the TA and the class list at least 3 days before the class meetings. All students are required to read at least 1 of the articles suggested by their colleagues and engage in the discussion.

May 12: Process tracing

George, A. L. and A. Bennett. 2003. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Chapter 10 (Process Tracing and Historical Explanation).

Checkel Jeffrey 2005. “It’s the Process Stupid! Process Tracing in the Study of European and International Politics” Arena Working Paper Series 26

Allison, Graham T. 1969. Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 63, No. 3. (Sep., 1969), p. 689-718

Andonova, Liliana B. 2008. “The Climate Regime and Domestic Politics: the Case of Russia,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21:4, p. 483-504

May 19: Discussion of final assignment

May 26: Final papers due