Political Science 102 May 18 th 2015

Theories and hypotheses Evidence Correlation and Causal Relationships Doing comparative research Your Term Paper Doing Research at Columbia College Group Work: Identifying Sources and Doing Citations

What is a theory? Definition: An explanation about how the world operates. Kinds of theory: Normative theory Values or morals Empirical theory Cause and effect

What is a hypothesis? Definition: Proposed explanation as to why an outcome occurs (your book provides a second definition: A specific prediction derived from a theory that can be tested against empirical evidence) Deductive vs Inductive reasoning Top down Bottom up Deviant cases What is a thesis?

Develop a hypothesis about an issue or an event Identify evidence to test hypothesis Hypotheses that survive initial testing are usually further challenged (extreme peer review) These challenges are, in turn tested, or further test the initial hypothesis

As more evidence is collected to support a hypothesis, or hypothesis is refined to reflect evidence, a theory emerges Theories are almost never expressly proven – they’re the best explanation for an issue at hand given the evidence available. This also means that theories can be wrong and, in time, disproven Exceptions to the rule

Qualitative evidence Evidence that seeks to understand relationships through narrative or written accounts of events (labour intensive, usually a small number of cases) Quantitative evidence Using mathematical models to discern relationships between variables (typically large number of cases) The nature of data, generally, means that comparativists consider past events, rather than predict future outcomes – though, there are many exceptions to this

What is correlation? Causation? Correlations can be positive relationships or negative relationships Complicated relationship between correlation and causation (one that the public often seems to confuse the public)

The definitional of falsifiability problem Measuring the same thing by a different name, or by definition one thing is the same as the other Reverse causality Endogeneity problem Circular arguments Intervening variables

Omitted variable problem Hidden variables that impact the variables being studied Spurious correlation problem Random correlation (superstition in sports)

Critiques are not only ‘criticisms’, but they can also be useful observations that challenge orthodoxy An empirical critique An evidence based criticism Deviant cases Identify short-comings in arguments and where they need work A theoretical critique Logical inconsistencies within a theory Alternative theory development

Finding appropriate indicators Measurement error Mistakes in recording evidence Failure to effectively measure that which is supposed to be measured Measurement bias Purposeful (or accidental) evidence collection designed to prove preferred hypothesis (rather than test it) Measurement validity How does one measure something like health outcomes?

Asking good research questions What makes for a good question? Answerable using evidence Interesting Answerable given the time and resources available Examines causal relationships

Creating and testing hypotheses Definitional consistency Grounded in a theory (we’ll cover a few of them during the course of term) Sometimes may need to draw from theories and evidence elsewhere Keep an open mind!

Arguments shouldn’t be trivial For instance, it’s evident that fascism typically leads to human rights abuses – stay away from very obvious arguments DO NOT COPY OTHER PEOPLE’S WORK! I can read other people’s work anytime I want – I can only read your thoughts and your work in this class….please let me do so This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t use previous work as evidence or a theoretical base The best research builds on existing research This is about building reasonable arguments with evidence

Where there is more than one important causal variable, prioritize them – which one’s are most important Use lots of sources Emulate (DO NOT COPY) the best work you can find When writing your paper: refer back to pg 43 of your book and review the guidelines for comparative research!