Research Design in Political Science

2007 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design

Rethinking Comparison

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
Comparative Methods ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
Qualitative Research Design

Qualitative comparative methods – and specifically controlled qualitative comparisons – are central to the study of politics. They are not the only kind of comparison, though, that can help us better understand political processes and outcomes. Yet there are few guides for how to conduct non-controlled comparative research. This volume brings together chapters from more than a dozen leading methods scholars from across the discipline of political science, including positivist and interpretivist scholars, qualitative methodologists, mixed-methods researchers, ethnographers, historians, and statisticians. Their work revolutionizes qualitative research design by diversifying the repertoire of comparative methods available to students of politics, offering readers clear suggestions for what kinds of comparisons might be possible, why they are useful, and how to execute them. By systematically thinking through how we engage in qualitative comparisons and the kinds of insights those comparisons produce, these collected essays create new possibilities to advance what we know about politics.

scholarly journals Generating Data

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 467-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor Knott
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Identity Politics ◽  
Census Data ◽  
Interview Data ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Political Ethnography ◽  
Elite Level ◽  
State Relations

This article argues that bottom–up, people-centered research which uses ethnographic and everyday approaches is crucial but underutilized in research on identity politics in Eastern Europe. In order to understand what concepts such as ethnicity and citizenship mean in the context of people’s everyday lives, it is vital to understand whether taken-for-granted political concepts are appropriate and the make-up of data such as census data. The article first introduces the methods of political ethnography and bottom–up interviews by discussing how they can be applied and their value within political science. The paper uses data gathered from interviews in Moldova and Crimea (when it was still a de jure and de facto part of Ukraine) to demonstrate the value of this approach. It shows how interview data can add significantly to the understanding of kin-state relations within political science by adding a richness of context and a bottom–up perspective that quantitative and elite-level interviews fail to provide. Lastly, the paper draws on experiences gained from research design to discuss how bottom–up research in political science can be conducted rigorously. The article argues that this approach can deepen the understanding of identity politics and kin-state relations or, more broadly, important post-communist questions such as democratization and Europeanization.

Shirking in the Contemporary Congress: A Reappraisal

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Carson ◽  
Michael H. Crespin ◽  
Jeffery A. Jenkins ◽  
Ryan J. Vander Wielen
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Electoral Connection ◽  
New Research ◽  
The U.S

This paper replicates the findings that appeared in the article “Severing the Electoral Connection: Shirking in the Contemporary Congress,” published in theAmerican Journal of Political Science(44:316–325), in which Lawrence Rothenberg and Mitchell Sanders incorporated a new research design and, contrary to all previous studies, found evidence of ideological shirking in the U.S. House of Representatives. We investigate the robustness of their results by reestimating their model with Congress-specific fixed effects and find that their results no longer hold.

Observing the Counterfactual? The Search for Political Experiments in Nature

2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 341-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Robinson ◽  
John E. McNulty ◽  
Jonathan S. Krasno
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Natural Experiment ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Natural Experiments ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Introductory Essay ◽  
Conference Presentations

A search of recent political science literature and conference presentations shows substantial fascination with the concept of the natural experiment. However, there seems to be a wide array of definitions and applications employed in research that purports to analyze natural experiments. In this introductory essay to the special issue, we attempt to define natural experiments and discuss related issues of research design. In addition, we briefly explore the basic methodological issues around the appropriate analysis of natural experiments and give an overview of different techniques. The overarching theme of this essay and of this issue is to encourage applied researchers to look for natural experiments in their own work and to think more systematically about research design.

Reducing Political Bias in Political Science Estimates

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (01) ◽  
pp. 179-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. J. Zigerell
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Sex Discrimination ◽  
Science Research ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Bias ◽  
Report Data ◽  
Analyze Data

ABSTRACTPolitical science researchers have flexibility in how to analyze data, how to report data, and whether to report on data. A review of examples of reporting flexibility from the race and sex discrimination literature illustrates how research design choices can influence estimates and inferences. This reporting flexibility—coupled with the political imbalance among political scientists—creates the potential for political bias in reported political science estimates. These biases can be reduced or eliminated through preregistration and preacceptance, with researchers committing to a research design before completing data collection. Removing the potential for reporting flexibility can raise the credibility of political science research.

scholarly journals Research Preregistration in Political Science: The Case, Counterarguments, and a Response to Critiques

2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (03) ◽  
pp. 425-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Monogan
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Historical Data ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Data Exploration ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
True Positive ◽  
Positive Results

ABSTRACTThis article describes the current debate on the practice of preregistration in political science—that is, publicly releasing a research design before observing outcome data. The case in favor of preregistration maintains that it can restrain four potential causes of publication bias, clearly distinguish deductive and inductive studies, add transparency regarding a researcher’s motivation, and liberate researchers who may be pressured to find specific results. Concerns about preregistration maintain that it is less suitable for the study of historical data, could reduce data exploration, may not allow for contextual problems that emerge in field research, and may increase the difficulty of finding true positive results. This article makes the case that these concerns can be addressed in preregistered studies, and it offers advice to those who would like to pursue study registration in their own work.

The Importance of Research Design in Political Science

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 475-481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary King ◽  
Robert O. Keohane ◽  
Sidney Verba
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design

Research design in political science

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 859-860
Author(s):  
Bernd Schlipphak
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design

Learning How to Do Research: An Exercise and Syllabus

1981 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 5-8
Author(s):  
Dean Schooler
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
The Political ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
Basic Approaches ◽  
Traditional Approaches

“You learn how to do research by doing research.” “You learn about research by studying others’ research.” “You learn research by studying the elements and requirements of research.” We have taught students, both undergraduate and graduate, about the research process with those three traditional approaches and sets of basic assumptions. However, the idea of a Research Process Vision provides a fourth alternative blending elements of the three basic approaches.The Research Process Vision is an exercise for students in studying and experiencing the political science research process. Basically, the project/ exercise serves as a vehicle for students to sense the varied elements and issues in research and research design through a hypothetical “envisioning” process. Specifically, they develop a paper or document which sketches out and discusses a potential research project, envisions what might exist or be done, and what might occur.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document