Type of Credit: Required
Credit(s)
Number of Students
This seminar offers an introduction to the methods used in social science research. In this class, students learn how to pose research questions, develop causal arguments within a theoretical framework, define and refine concepts, construct valid and reliable measures, and collect data.
能力項目說明
No previous background in methodology is assumed—the goal of this course is to provide students with the analytic tools to undertake their own research and to evaluate the work of others. While students will be exposed to qualitative and quantitative approaches, this course only introduces basic concepts and focuses on the preliminary process of research design. Students are encouraged to develop their skills in each type of methodological approach in advanced methodology courses if needed.
WEEK 1 Introduction
WEEK 2 What is a Social Science?
Gabriel A. Almond, “Separate Tables: Schools and Sects in Political Science,” PS: Political Science and Politics 21:4 (Autumn 1988), pp. 828-842.
Theda Skocpol, “Doubly Engaged Social Science: The Promise of Comparative Historical Analysis,” in the James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 407-28.
Suggested
Gabriel A. Almond and Stephen Genco, “Clouds, Clocks, and the Study of Politics,” World Politics 29:4 (July 1977), pp. 489-522.
Patrick J. McGovern, ed., “Symposium – Perestroika in Political Science: Past, Present, and Future,” PS: Political Science & Politics 43:4 (October 2010), pp. 725-54.
WEEK 3 Overview of the Field: Debates about the Research Styles and Goals
Henry E. Brady, David Collier, and Jason Seawright, “Refocusing the Discussion of Methodology,” in Henry Brady and David Collier, eds., Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, pp. 3-20.
King et al., Ch. 1.
James Mahoney, “After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research” World Politics 62:1 (January 2010), pp. 120-47.
Charles C. Ragin, The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), Ch. 1.
Suggested
James Mahoney and Gary Goertz, “A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research,” Political Analysis 14:3 (Summer 2006), pp. 227-249.
WEEK 4 Fundamentals of Causal Analysis
Henry E. Brady, David Collier, and Gerado L. Munck, “The Quest for Standards,” in Henry Brady and David Collier, eds., Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, pp. 21-50
King et al., Section 3.5
James Mahoney, “Toward a Unified Theory of Causality,” Comparative Political Studies 41: 4/5 (April/ May 2008), pp. 412-436.
Charles C. Ragin, The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), Ch. 2.
Suggested
Charles Ragin, Fuzzy-Set Social Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), Ch. 4.
WEEK 5 Concept Formation
David Collier and James Mahoney, “Conceptual ‘Stretching’ Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Politics,” American Political Science Review 87:4 (December 1993), pp. 845-55.
Charles O. Jones, “Doing Before Knowing: Concept Development in Political Research,” American Journal of Political Science 18:1 (February 1974), pp. 215-228.
Giovanni Satori, “Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics,” American Political Science Review 64:4 (December 1970), pp. 1033-1053.
Suggested
David Collier and John Gerring eds., Concepts & Method in Social Science: The Tradition of Giovanni Satori (London: Routledge, 2009), Chs. 2-6, 10.
John Gerring, “What Makes a Concept Good? An Integrated Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Science,” Polity 31:3 (Spring 1999), pp. 357-93.
WEEK 6 Student Presentations
WEEK 7 Student Presentations
WEEK 8 Issues of Measurement
Robert Adcock and David Collier, “Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research,” American Political Science Review 95:3 (September 2001), pp. 529-546.
William G. Jacoby, “Levels of Measurement and Political Research: An Optimistic View,” American Journal of Political Science 43:1 (January 1999), pp. 271-301.
King et al., Section 5.1
Suggested
Zachary Elkins, “Gradations of Democracy? Empirical Tests of Alternative Conceptualizations,” American Journal of Political Science 44: 2 (April 2000), pp. 293-300.
WEEK 9 Experimental Designs
Charles M. Judd, Eliot R. Smith, and Louise H. Kidder Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: Holt Rinehart, and Winston; 6th edition, 1991), Chs. 4-5.
Rose McDermott “Experimental Methodology in Political Science,” Political Analysis 10:4 (2002), pp. 325-61.
Suggested
Shanto Iyengar, Mark D. Peters, and Donald R. Kinder, “Experimental Demonstrations of the ‘Sot So Minimal’ Consequences of Television News,” American Political Science Review 76:4 (December 1982), pp. 848-858.
WEEK 10 Observational Designs
King et al., Chapters 4 & 6.
WEEK 11 Case Selections
David Collier, James Mahoney, and Jason Seawright, “Claiming Too Much: Warning about Selection Bias,” in Henry Brady and David Collier, eds., Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, pp. 85-102.
Barbara Geddes, “How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics,” Political Analysis 2 (1990), pp. 131-50.
James Mahoney and Gary Goertz, “The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Qualitative Research,” American Political Science Review 98:4 (November 2004), pp. 653-670.
Suggested
Donald Campbell, “Degrees of Freedom and the Case Studies,” Comparative Political Studies 8:2 (July 1975), pp. 178-93.
WEEK 12 Gathering Information: History and Non-observational Approaches
Ian S. Lustick, “History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical Records and the Problem of Selection Bias,” American Political Science Review 90:3 (September 1996), pp. 605-618.
James Mahoney, Erin Kimball, and Kendra Koivu, “The Logic of Historical Explanation in the Social Sciences,” Comparative Political Studies 42:1 (January 2009), pp. 114-146.
James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, “Comparative Historical Analysis: Achievements and Agendas,” in the James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 3-38.
Paul Pierson, “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics,” American Political Science Review 94:2 (June 2000), pp. 251-68.
Suggested
Kathleen Thelen, “How Institutions Evolve: Insights from Comparative Historical Analysis,” in the James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 208-240.
WEEK 13 Gathering Information: Small N Analysis
Sharon Werning Rivera, Polina M. Kozyreva, and Eduard G. Sarovskii, “Interviewing Political Elites: Lessons from Russia,” PS: Political Science and Politics 35:4 (December 2002), pp. 683-688.
Herbert J. Rubin, and Irene S. Rubin, Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1995), Chs. 4, 6, and 7.
Suggested
Joel D. Aberbach, James D. Chesney, and Bert A. Rockman, “Exploring Elite Political Attitude: Some Methodological Lessons,” Political Methodology 2 (1975), pp. 1-27.
WEEK 14 Gathering Information: Large N Analysis
Charles M. Judd, Eliot R. Smith, and Louise H. Kidder Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: Holt Rinehart, and Winston; 6th edition, 1991), Chs. 10-11.
Suggested
Herbert F. Weisberg, Jon A. Krosnick, and Bruce D. Bowen, An Introduction to Survey Research, Polling, and Data Analysis (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996), Chs. 4 and 6.
WEEK 15 Goals and Trade-offs
David Collier, James Mahoney, and Jason Seawright, “ Critiques, Responses, and Trade-Offs,” in Henry Brady and David Collier, eds., Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, pp. 195-228.
Sidney Tarrow, “Bridging the Qualitative- Quantitative Divide,” in Henry Brady and David Collier, eds., Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, pp. 171-80.
Suggested
Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (New York: John Wiley, 1970), Ch. 1.
WEEK 16 Paper Presentations
WEEK 17 Paper Presentations
WEEK 18 Wrap Up
Class Participation 40%
Mini Research Proposal 20%
Research Design Paper 40%