CP 1- What is CP

causal

(not descriptive) avoid questions that are purely factual/descriptive should be about a relationship- how one thing affects another is russia a democracy vs why are oil rich countries autocracies?

how do we build arguments in comparative politics?

- ask questions - formulate hypothesis - use the comparative method

approaches to comparative research

- quantitative - qualitative -mixed methods

Scientific Method

1) ask a research question 2) develop a hypothesis 3) collect empirical data 4) evaluate the hypothesis 5) repetition

How to Generate a Good Hypothesis

1) identify a IV and DV 2) make an explicit comparison 3) state the nature of the relationship 4) be specific 5) make sure its testable and falsifiable

How to formulate a hypothesis

1) identify a theory/model 2) deduce implications (hypothesis)

challenges of comparative research

1) separating correlation from causation 2)identifying causation is hard 3)assessing unreliable information

what makes a good research question

1) variation 2) appropriate scope/level of generality 3) causal 4) time invariant 5) empirical 6) significant

quantitative exmaple

EX economic performance impacts election outcomes Dates of elections and the percent of the vote of the incumbent party Information on the state of the economy in preceding months Economic data with the election results

qualitative research

Focus on an in depth understanding of attributes and outcomes DEPTH over breadth interview, field research, interpretations helps causal arguments from strengthening our understanding of the things that link causes to effects

Quantitative

Relies on statistical data to assess relationships between attributes and outcomes, analyzing those data using computers BREADTH over depth Allows for precise assessment of the relationship between causes and effects

mixed methods research

Uses both quantitative and qualitative techniques to build convincing claims about the relationships between attributes and outcomes

hypothesis

argument linking cause to effect

time invariant

avoid future oriented questions

falsifiable

avoid statemnts about unobserved phenomena or tautologies (strong states are better are implementing policies)

Method of Agreement

compares and contrasts cases with different attributes but shared outcomes, seeking the one attribute these cases share in common to attribute causality if 2 or more examples of a phenomenon have only one of many causal attributes in common, then the attribute all the cases share is the cause of the outcome

Method of Difference

compares and contrasts cases with the same attributes but different outcomes -- determines causality by finding an attribute that is present when an outcome occurs but that is absent in similar cases when the outcome does not occur

Nature of the relationship

is it negatively related, or positive?

correlation

measure of observed association between 2 variables ethnic diversity and civil war are correlated when change in value of x brings a change in y -- does not mean x causes y

empirical

not normative (ought or should) should neighbors intervene in civil war? empirical = is or does - when does military intervention prevent civil war?

appropriate scope/level of generality

not too narrow or too broad

causation

process or event that brings an observable event -- need relevant examples and to rule out potential alternative causes

identify a theory /model

rationalist: political outcomes are determined by individuals pursing self interest materialist: economic organzation of society produces interests, conflicts cultural: individuals act in accordance with their values and indentity and this determines outcome institutional: structure and contraints of poli institutions affect behavior and outcomes

comparison

statemnt: rurual residents are more religion hypothesis: compared to residents in urban areas, rurual residents are more religious residence is IV level of religiousness is DV

deduce implication

testable statement about the empirical relationship between an independent variable (cause X) and dependent (y EFFECT) If my theory is correct, what should I expect to observe? "An educated guess"

falsifiable

the possibility that a hypothesized relationship can be shown to be incorrect

politics

the process of making and contesting authoritative decisions about the distributions of rights, responsibilities, wealth, and power

comparative politics

the systematic search for answers to political questions about how people around the world make and contest authoritative public choices -- why people around the world make similar decisions under different political rules or vice versa

variation

there has to be variation in the outcome of interest otherwise it cant give an explanation or test the explanation Why do some residents of MI vote rep, and others dem? -- but what if everyone votes democrat

comparative method

way of examining patterns of facts/events to narrow down whats important in terms of building a convincing CP argument

Assessing unreliable information

we cant control or isolate factors to determine causality, have to just use the information of the world that can be ambiguous or unavailable

what makes CP a science

we use the scientific method Using empirical observation, control comparison, replication, falsification as procedures for research KEY: you have to be willing to be proven wrong (with good data)

significant

will contribute to the acquisition of scientific knowledge