Empirical Political Analysis

International Edition

Richard C. Rich, Craig Leonard Brians, Jarol B. Manheim, Lars Willnat

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351613743
• Edition: 9
• Topic: Psicologia
• Subtopic: Ricerche e metodologie nella psicologia

Empirical Political Analysis introduces readers to the foundations of social science research. Organized around the stages of the research process, this textbook prepares readers to conduct both quantitative and qualitative research, from the formation of theory through the design of research projects, to the collection of data and the analysis of results. It offers a clear and concise presentation of basic concepts and tools that can be applied in a wide range of research settings and highlights ethical conduct in the research process. It will help you both to achieve sound results in your own research and to critically evaluate research presented by others.

Key features:

• 
  
  

• Offers comprehensive coverage of quantitative and qualitative research methods in political science – this book is one of the key texts in the field of political research methods since it was first published over 25 years ago.

• 
  
  

  
  
  

• Covers the research process from start to finish—hypothesis formation, literature review, research design, data gathering, data analysis, and research report writing.

• 
  
  

  
  
  

• Includes in-depth examples of political science research to give discipline-specific instruction on political analysis.

• 
  
  

  
  
  

• Features a "Practical Research Ethics" box in every chapter to make students aware of common ethical dilemmas and potential solutions to them.

• 
  
  

  
  
  

• Includes learning goals, key terms, and research examples to help students engage and explore the most important concepts.

New to this edition:

• 
  
  

• Updated and international case studies.

• 
  
  

  
  
  

• New material on understanding research design – what constitutes a sound research design and how this contributes to being able to justify research findings.

Part I

Introduction

1

Research as a Process

In this chapter you will learn:

• How research methods can be important to you
• How and why we formulate and test theories
• How scientific research differs from other approaches to knowledge
• The six steps of the social science research process

Several recent social and political events have led many observers to argue that we now live in a “post fact” (or “post truth”) era in which people will believe and base their actions on almost anything, even when there is no sound evidence that it is true. One problem with this approach to politics is that it is the facts—the actual realities—that will determine what impact our actions have. If our perceptions of reality don’t line up with the way the world actually works, we will be unable to reach the goals we truly value.

The goal of this book is to give you the intellectual tools to independently evaluate factual claims so that you are not misled. It will present the most basic elements of scientific research so that any reader can apply them to gather valid information about important relationships and to assess the claims that others make about how things work. Social scientific research is often used as a basis for both public policy and legal decisions. It is, therefore, increasingly important that you be able to judge the merits of research and factual claims in order to discharge the responsibilities of citizenship in a democratic society.

Making Scientific Political Theories

To most people the word “theory” seems very abstract and even intimidating. In fact, we all instinctively find our way through the world by formulating miniature “theories” about how things work. Even young children quickly recognize that their parents behave in predictable ways when they do certain things and use this knowledge to try to get what they want. As we mature, we apply this same logic to more and more complex situations in order to navigate both physical and social life. We observe patterns, draw conclusions about cause-and-effect relationships, and then act on those conclusions. Science offers a way to formalize the process of drawing conclusions from observation so that we can avoid reaching incorrect conclusions.

Empirical Versus Normative Analysis

Social scientists distinguish between obtaining knowledge and using knowledge. Dealing with factual realities is termed empirical analysis. Dealing with how we should use our knowledge of the world is termed normative analysis.

Empirical analysis is concerned with developing and using a common, objective language to describe and explain reality. It can be quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative analyses are based on math-based comparisons of the characteristics of the various objects or events that we study. Qualitative analyses are based on the researcher’s informed and contextual understanding of objects or events.

Normative analysis is concerned with developing and examining subjective values and ethical rules to guide us in judging and applying what we have learned about reality. Although the emphasis in this book is on empirical analysis, it seeks to develop an appreciation of the larger, normative perspective within which knowledge is acquired, interpreted, and applied through a discussion of the ethics of research.

Normative analysis without an empirical foundation can lead to value judgments that are out of touch with reality. Empirical analysis in the absence of sensitivity to normative concerns, on the other hand, can lead to the collection of observations whose significance we are not prepared to understand fully. The objective in undertaking political inquiry is to draw upon both types of analysis—empirical and normative—so as to maximize not only our factual knowledge, but also our ability to use the facts we discover wisely.

Practical Research Ethics

Ethics in research and in life

At each stage of the research process, and in each chapter of this book, you will confront choices that present ethical challenges. As you conduct research (and live your life), you should keep the potential consequences of your actions in mind. Throughout this book, you will detect the tension that exists in our discipline between our interest in learning about human behavior and our concern that we may be negatively affecting people through our research. Sometimes your research may directly affect a person, as when you ask survey questions that arouse fears or stir powerful memories in those interviewed. Your research may also influence people more indirectly, such as when your findings are utilized by judges as they interpret the law, or policy makers deciding things that will affect people’s lives.

As you are evaluating your behavior, consider the weight that others in society and government give to the importance of ethical conduct. In class, unethical use of others’ research in your writings is called plagiarism and may cause you to receive a failing grade in the course, or even be expelled by your college. In academic research, failing to obtain prior permission to carry out research or not fully protecting human or animal research subjects will lead to sanctions against you and may well cost you both your reputation and your career. In business, using others’ copyrighted material without permission may be punishable with fines amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars and a prison sentence.

Clearly, our society values ethical behavior. As a result, this text seeks to promote ethical conduct at each stage of the research process by suggesting specific strategies you can use to foster and develop your ethical compass.

Scientific Knowledge

Scientific research is a way of gaining valid knowledge that provides a common language for discussing realities. Scientific research is not the only way of knowing, but it is for many purposes the most practically effective. People can know things through experience, but not everyone shares the same experiences. People can know things by unstructured observation, but they may not note all relevant aspects of events or see them in the same way that others do. Some people can “know” things by seeing visions, but not everyone can be trained in visionary methods or will accept others’ visions as valid. None of these other ways of knowing allows for the sharing of facts or the knowledge of how those facts were obtained as well as the scientific approach does. As a result, the scientific method has become the most widely accepted path to material progress.

Defining the Scientific Method

Scientific research is explicit, systematic, and controlled. It is explicit in that all the rules for defining and examining reality are clearly stated. Nothing is hidden from view, and nothing is taken on faith. Scientific research is systematic in that it follows a widely agreed to set of procedures so that each item of evidence is linked by reason or observation to other items of evidence. There are clear rules for determining what is known and for explaining how it came to be. It is controlled in that the phenomena (objects and events) under analysis are observed in as rigorous a manner as is possible with existing technology, resources, and knowledge. Generalized conclusions are reached only after thorough and painstaking assessment. In science, caution (in the larger sense of exercising great care and attention to detail) is a watchword. Because it is done in this constrained way, scientific research allows people from different places and backgrounds to communicate about reality and to agree on what has been established as fact. It is for this reason that the scientific method is widely applied to the study of politics.

Scientific research is a self-correcting, continuously developing way of knowing in which each piece of research builds on previous work. This is possible because the rules for doing research are commonly understood by those trained in scientific inquiry. Other books will discuss other approaches to studying the political and social world, but this text focuses exclusively on qualitative and quantitative research methods based on the assumptions of the scientific method that there is an objective reality and that we can observe it.

Scientific research is a method of testing theories and hypotheses by applying certain rules of analysis to the observation and interpretation of reality under strictly defined circumstances. These are the rules and constraints that we must learn in order to gain and communicate knowledge in the science of politics.

Six Steps in the Research Process

Political science research is best thought of as a process of gathering and interpreting information. This research process generally follows a standard progression, although researchers often return to an earlier stage when new information alters our understandings. The six distinct but highly interrelated stages of the research process are:

1. 1 The formation of a theory
2. 2 The operationalization of that theory
3. 3 The selection of research techniques and development of a research plan
4. 4 The observation of behavior and collection of data
5. 5 The analysis of data
6. 6 The interpretation of the results

The rest of the book is organized around these six stages, but it is useful to review them in this chapter to put each of the elements you will encounter into context.

The Formation of Theory

The objective of scientific research is to be able to explain and predict events in the world. The first step in this process is to decide what to study by selecting an appropriate research question. This step is guided by both normative and empirical considerations. A question is generally considered to be worthy of research either because it fulfills a scientific need—in that its answer will further our theoretical understanding of some phenomenon—or because it fulfills a societal need—because its answer may help us to deal with one or more of the problems faced by our society.

These two types of research questions are frequently termed basic research and applied research. Although some research questions can serve both purposes, we frequently have to choose which goal we want to pursue. For example, should we study the determinants of aggression under conditions of stress in order to develop a predictive model of human behavior, or should we instead focus on the reasons ethnic conflicts occur in a specific nation and investigate ways to prevent them? Should we examine the decision-making processes of national leaders to help us understand the nature of political leadership, or should we instead concentrate on identifying and avoiding the types of decisions that lead to war?

Because there are too few scientific resources (money, time, and trained personnel) to study all important research questions, there is often a conflict between the need to perform basic research—whose practical payoffs, however great, are almost always felt only indirectly and well into the future—and the need to apply scientific knowledge for the immediate benefit of humanity, even though we may, in the process, delay or prevent the further development of our scientific understanding. This choice must be made by individual researchers in accordance with their own values and opportunities.

Once you have identified the problem you want to tackle and the type of contribution you wish to make, you need to frame a more specific research question. First, it is crucial to recognize that important social phenomena are highly complex. No single research project can fully examine any major political question. The purpose of a research question is to guide you in focusing on a clearly defined portion of the events you want to explain.

Second, you must formulate your research question in light of prior research on the subject so that you are not investigating a question that has already been answered and so you can build on that research in designing your project rather than “reinventing the wheel.” If the issue you want to study has not been extensively examined by other researchers, you will want to look for research on similar events and to draw on your own powers of observation and reasoning to identify the most important elements of the behavior you are seeking to understand.

A Simple Example

Let us imagine that in the middle of the desert there is a town called Little America that consists exclusively of several miles of service stations and restaurants.¹ One can do nothing in Little America except eat and buy gas.

Now, suppose we have decided to study the voting behavior of Little Americans in presidential elections so that we may explain why one person votes Democratic while another votes Republican. In this greatly simplified example, the subjects of our analysis (residents of Little America) differ from one another in only two ways besides their voting preferences: each is either an owner or a worker, and each is associated with either a service station or a restaurant. Each of these factors, which political scientists term variables, represents a characteristic of a particular individual. One citizen of Little America might be (1) an employee of (2) a restaurant (3) who votes Democratic, whereas another is (1) an owner of (2) a service station (3) who votes Republican. We wish to explain differences in voting behavior in terms of other differences among the voters. In this instance, we have only two to choose from: employee or owner status and service station or restaurant affiliation. We can refer to these, respectively, as socioeconomic status (SES)—with ownership representing higher status than employment—and business affiliation. Is there any reason to expect that knowing either characteristic of a particular person will help us predict his or her voting preference?

To answer that question, we must do two things. First, we must ask ourselves: Is there any logical reason to expect either of these factors to influence voting behavior? Second, we must consult the political science literature: Is there in previous studies any empirical evidence that one or the other of these factors influences voting behavior? In reality, there is little reason to expect the business-affiliation variable to make much difference in voting behavior in this instance. Diff...