PS 372 Introduction Practical Application 1 As citizens

PS 372 Introduction

Practical Application • 1. ) As citizens in the US you are often called upon to evaluate empirical research and theoretical arguments about political phenomena. (Debates on Abortion / Death Penalty; Election Polls in US; Events in other parts of the world) • 2. ) As students you are often required to acquire scientific knowledge yourself. (term papers for undergraduate courses; research proposals for upperlevel seminars; research projects for most, if not all, graduate programs. • 3. ) Useful skills that build a resume for future jobs.

DETAILS FOR: Job #05054 --LHP Job Title: Research Assistant (R 01) Status: Regular, Full-time Center: Labor and Social Policy Reports To: Center Director JOB SUMMARY Research assistants will assist senior researchers with quantitative research projects related to welfare policy, poverty, employment, and/or immigration. Responsibilities include compiling and analyzing data sets (using SAS and/or Stata), running regression analyses and generating output tables, conducting literature searches and reviews, and helping with other steps in the research process. EXPERIENCE Requires excellent quantitative skills with experience in Stata, SAS, or similar statistical analysis package. Prior research experience preferred. This position requires detail-oriented, self-motivated individual who can work independently as well as part of a team. EDUCATION BA/BS in a social science preferred.

Subfields in Political Science • American Politics – Political Institutions – Behavior • Comparative Politics - European Politics - African Politics • International Relations – IPE – International Conflict/Security • Political Theory • Public Administration/Policy

History of Political Science • Traditional – Historical, Legalism, Philosophy, Descriptive • Modern – “Behavioralism” – Political science as “science” – Facilitated by development of technology, computers

Card Reader (1960’s-70’s)

Tape Unit (1960’s-70’s)

Methods of Knowing • Ordinary Human Inquiry / Intuition • Tradition • Authority • All Subjective • Science can be seen as an attempt to overcome the flaws of these alternatives (Objective)

Science • Effort to understand the world (explain various phenomena) by systematically examining causal relationships among variables • Scientific explanation must have both logical and empirical support

Who Uses Science? • Natural sciences – Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy, etc. • Social sciences – Psychology, Sociology, Economics, Criminology, Anthropology, Political Science

3 Criticisms of Social Science • Absence of universal laws in social world – Deterministic vs. Probabilistic relationships • Social science research tends to test the obvious • Questions irrelevant /arcane

Important Research? ?

Is Political Science Arcane?

The Business of Social Research • Where – universities (teaching vs. research universities), research institutes, government • Who – people with Ph. D. ’s (with help from graduate students at universities) • Outlets for research – conferences, journals, books

The Business of Social Research • Grants – NSF – Research Foundations Government Institutions / Organizations

PS Journals • Discipline-wide: American Political Science Review, Journal of Politics, American Journal of Political Science • Many specialized journals for different fields: – American Politics - American Politics Quarterly, State Politics and Policy Quarterly – Comparative Politics - African Affairs, European Journal of Political Research – International Relations - Journal of Conflict Management and Peace Science, International Organization

The Scientific Process • Scientific process differs from other forms of knowing in that it is based on well defined principles for collecting, analyzing, and evaluating information. Two paths to the scientific process: • Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning

The Scientific Process • Inductive Explanation – The process of reasoning from specific observation to general theory • Deductive Explanation – The process of reasoning from general theory to specific observation

• 1. Which of the following claims would be best expressed by inductive reasoning? • Your first quiz grade usually indicates how you will do in the course. • The final exam accounts for 30% of the course grade. • Late papers will not be accepted. • Political Science Research Methods is required reading in your course.

• Which of the following claims would be best expressed by deductive reasoning? • • Kentucky's population growth rate slowed last year. Kentucky residents appreciate their good weather. Kentucky residents are residents of the United States. More cars are registered in Kentucky than in any other state.

The Scientific Process The Scientific Method • • • Research Question Theory and Hypotheses Research Design Operationalization (measurement) Empirical Observation and Analysis

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Empirical Verification – a statement must be proved true by means of actual objective observation of phenomena

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Normative vs. non-normative – normative: value-laden, evaluative, “ought” or “should”, prescriptive – Non-normative: factual, objective - Scientific Knowledge is value-free, what might be in the future and why and typically does not address whether something is “good” or “bad”

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Transmissible – Methods utilized must be explicitly detailed so others can analyze and replicate the findings – Why? – Test conclusions – Eliminate Bias

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Falsifiable - A key and crucial aspect of science that separates it from other forms of “knowledge” - The assertions (hypotheses) can, in principle, be rejected in the of contravening empirical evidence -

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • “Champions” until defeated / Cumulative • Standing on the shoulders of giants • Both in terms of substantive findings and research methods

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Explanatory – Answers “why” and “how” kinds of questions – Provides a systematic, empirically verified understanding of why a phenomenon occurs. – A conclusion can be logically and empirically derived from a set of general principles and specific starting conditions. – In other words, when things of type X occur, they will be followed by things of type Y.

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Parsimonious – All things being equal, the simplest explanation is the best. • Ockham’s Razor

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Deals with the Scientific Evaluation of Dependent and Independent Variables • Dependent – (Y) • Independent – (X) • Control – (X)

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Causal Relationship – X causes Y (not coincidence) – Example: fire trucks and fire, fertilizer causes plant growth Correlation Relationship (Probabilistic Explanation) - X is correlated with Y (we think its causal but cannot be certain) - Example: Higher Levels of Economic Development lead to Democratization

Spuriousness • When we believe a phenomena (the dependent variable – Y) is caused by a particular influence (the independent variable – X) but it is in fact caused by a third variable that correlates with both. 1. )X Y 2. )X Y 3. )X Y Z

Why Correlation and Not Causation in Social Science? • Most of the time we cannot conduct completely controlled experiments. • Often we do not have enough observations to definitively guarantee Causation. • Dealing with the vast variability of human choice and action (Rational Choice and Neurology as alternatives)

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Generalizable - Applicable to many rather than just a few cases. * Empirical Generalization – summarizes the relationship between two individual facts.

Distinguishing Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge • Validity – External Validity – We say that a study has external validity when it can be generalized from the specific experiment to the world as a whole. External validity is about generalizabilty. We want to be able to generalize our findings beyond specific individual cases. – Internal Validity - We say that a study has internal validity when it not only has reliable measures of independent and dependent variables BUT also a strong justification that causally links the independent variables to the dependent variables. At the same time, you are able to rule out extraneous (control) variables, or alternative, often unanticipated, causes for your dependent variables. Thus strong internal validity refers to the unambiguous assignment of causes to effects. Internal validity is about causal control.

Important Note • Commonsense knowledge, casual observation, and superstition can be valid and true but they are not scientific if they are not empirically verified.