Overview
In this module, we will begin by considering what is meant by empirical research, and why political science is considered a (social) science. We will examine the strengths and limitations of applying a scientific approach to the study of politics, and introduce two broad approaches – quantitative and qualitative – that researchers use to study politics. Thus, this module starts your journey to achieve a number of overarching POLS 256 learning outcomes, specifically to develop your abilities to describe the dominant empirical research methods used in political science; explain the strengths and limitations of various research methods as means to answer specific research questions; compare and contrast different research methods with respect to their ability to make causal and generalizable claims; and apply understanding of the strengths and limitations of various research methods to thoughtfully critique empirical political science research. As we proceed through the course, I will keep coming back to these ideas. To help you better understand and engage with the ideas that we are covering in the modules ahead, I strongly encourage you to discuss the course material in the class discussion boards.
When you have finished this module, you should be able to do the following:
- Summarize the scope of POLS 256;
- Distinguish between normative and empirical analysis, and explain the role of each in arguments;
- Explain what evidence is and the role of the scientific method in establishing evidence; and describe key assumptions of the scientific approach; and
- Differentiate between quantitative and qualitative approaches, explaining their key differences.
- Watch mini-lectures “Welcome to POLS 256” and “Using Learning Theory to Make Studying More Effective and Efficient”
- Read Chapter 1 in the 3rd edition of our textbook or Chapter 1 in the 4th edition of our textbook and create self-study flashcards for the chapter.
- Watch mini-lectures “Normative and Empirical Approaches”, “Evidence and the Scientific Study of Politics”, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Using the Scientific Method to Study Politics”, “Introduction to Quantitative Approaches”, “Introduction to Qualitative Approaches”, and “Key Differences between Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches”
- Complete Learning Activity.
- Argument
- Normative analysis
- Empirical research
- Evidence
- Scientific analysis
- Positivism
- Determinism
- Empiricism
- Objectivity
- Intersubjectivity
- Quantitative research
- Case
- Large-N study
- Hypothesis
- Hypothesis testing
- Operationalization
- Qualitative research
- Small-N study
- Chapter 1 in Berdahl, Loleen and Keith Archer. Explorations: Conducting Empirical Research in Canadian Political Science (Third Edition). Oxford University Press OR Chapter 1 in Berdahl, Loleen and Jason Roy. Explorations: Conducting Empirical Research in Canadian Political Science (Fourth Edition). Oxford University Press
Learning Material
Learning Activity
Blog Post
- Listen to the podcast You Are Not So Smart, episode 147 “The Replication Crisis” (https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/you-are-not-so-smart/id521594713?i=1000429584935). Write a 300-500 word commentary in the style of a blog post that explains why replication is important to the scientific process. Draw on the podcast and the module materials (videos, readings) to make an argument about whether the replication crisis should affect the general public’s confidence in the scientific process. In writing your blog post, use the first person singular, and aim for a personal, engaging tone. Be sure that all terminology used from the module is used correctly. End your blog post with a “call to action” that encourages readers to interact with your ideas. (E.g., “Do you agree that the file drawer problem is a serious issue? Share your comments below!”). Proofread carefully.
- Post your blog post in your Learning Activity Discussion Board on Canvas.
- Provide a constructive response to at least one of your fellow group members’ posts. A constructive response is one that (a) uses supportive language to (b) identify for the author an area in which the work can be strengthened. For example, it may identify an issue where the wording is unclear or a point where terminology is used incorrectly, or suggest ideas for examples or ways to strengthen the argument, or let the author know of questions that the work raised for them. A constructive response goes beyond ‘I agree’ or ‘that is interesting’ to assist the author in improving the work. It should provide feedback that is intended to assist the author of the learning activity in improving their work
Reminder: At the end of Module 4, you are required to select one learning activity for submission from Modules 1-4. You can use the feedback that you receive in the group forum to revise your selected learning activity prior to submission.
Glossary
Argument: series of logical statements that lead to a conclusion, with reasons offered to support the conclusion
Case: a single unit of analysis/study
Determinism: the belief that every event has an explanation or cause
Empirical research: the reliance on observation of the real world to test theories and gain knowledge
Empiricism: the belief that almost everything can be objectively measured
Evidence: data/information that provide basis for a position/point of view
Hypothesis: a statement of a proposed causal relationship between two concepts
Hypothesis testing: a method used in statistics to test the validity of a statement by comparing expected results with empirical or observed results; typically involves testing the null hypothesis and, based on the results, deciding whether or not to reject it
Intersubjectivity: a phenomenon is experienced by more than one person (i.e., two people, acting independently, perceive the same thing).
Large-N study: research involving a large number of cases
Normative analysis: type of analysis that is value-laden, in which indications of ought or should are often used
Objectivity: the extent to which a study’s results are unbiased by the researcher’s predispositions
Operationalization: the process of moving from a conceptual definition (an abstraction) to a measure of set of measures (concrete) that enables a researcher to empirically observe the construct in his or her particular research project
Positivism: a philosophical position that states that the scientific approach is the best way to gain knowledge
Qualitative research: the non-numerical examination of reality; typically conducted through the use of verbal depiction
Quantitative research: the numerical examination of reality; usually conducted through the use of statistical analysis
Scientific analysis: analysis that uses the scientific method, in whichever discipline the study is taking place
Small-N study: research involving a small number of cases
References
Berdahl, Loleen and Keith Archer. 2015. Explorations: Conducting Empirical Research in Canadian Political Science (Third Edition). Oxford University Press.
Dutia, Mayank and Celine Caquineau. 2015. Critical Thinking in Global Challenges. Coursera.org.
Edwards, Kari and Edward E. Smith, Edward. 1996. “A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 71(1), Jul 1996, 5-24.
Eller, Warren, Brian Gerber and Scott Robinson. 2013. Public Administration Research Methods: Tools for Evaluation and Evidence-Based Practice. Routledge.
Edward J. Mullen and David L. Streiner. 2004. “The Evidence For and Against Evidence-Based Practice.” Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention 4(2), 111-121.
Nickerson, Raymond S. “Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises.” Review of General Psychology, Vol 2(2), Jun 1998, 175-220.
Oakley, Barbara and Terrence Sejnowski. 2015. Learning How to Learn: Powerful mental tools to help you master tough subjects. Coursera.org
Rubin, Allen. 2008. Practitioner’s Guide to Using Research for Evidence-Based Practice. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter and Ram Neta. 2015. Think Again: How to Reason and Argue. Coursera.org.