Syllabus
1) Organization (requirements, deadlines etc.); why methodology matters?
Methodology vs. methods
The three research traditions
Quantitative (formal models and statistics)
Qualitative (case studies, comparative case studies)
Interpretative and critical
Methodology in political science (1950-2015)
Methodology in social sciences in general (1900-2015) 2) Epistemologies and their implications (Chernoff 2007, Monteiro, Ruby 2009, Sayer 2000/1992, Friedman 1954)
Neo-positivism
Scientific/critical – realism
Post-structuralism
Implications for research 3) Starting your research (Gerring 2017)
Research goals and questions
Filling in the lacuna
Defining broader purpose of a paper
Logic of inquiry vs. logic of presentation 4) On theories and concepts (Van Evera 1997, Gerring 2013)
Patterns and regularities
What is a theory (causal and constitutive) ?
What is a (good) concept, and how does a theory differ from a concept
Idiographic vs. nomothetic science
Explanation vs. interpretation
Types of research (specific requirements):
Causal (theory testing, theory development, scenarios, policy evaluation)
Conceptual (concept building/assessment)
Interpretative (post-structuralist research)
Literature assessing
Descriptive (historical, unique cases, measurement) 5) Building and assessing a concept (Gerring 2012, Goertz 2007)
Fecundity, resonance, causal power etc.
Two extremes: Conceptual stretching vs. case unique concept
Concepts through lenses of different epistemologies 6) Operationalization and measurement (Moheney, Goertz 2012, Gerring 2017, Skaaning, Pemstein)
Operationalization in Qualitative vs. quantitative research tradition
Measurement; as a tool and as a goal 7) Data (Trachtenberg 2005, Schuessler 2015)
Data entering a research (or why data never speaks for itself)
Biased data, how to deal with them?
How not to treat primary and secondary literature
Societal/political context of public/private data
Ethics of data collection and publication 8) What is a case study; Structured focused comparison; Mills methods (George, Bennett 2005, Ragin 2009, Liberson 1991)
What is a case study?
Structured focused comparison
Method of (dis)agreement
Critique – Small N´s big conclusions 9) Most-likely/Least likely (plausibility probe), Congruence method (George, Bennett 2004, Gerring 2007)
Congruence method – experimental template
Intuitive properties of hard and easy tests
Bayesian perspective?
Critique 10) Quant x qual divide… how many research paradigms (Mahoney, Goertz 2012 and reactions)
Comparative advantages/disadvantages
Obstacles for mixed method research
Causes of effects vs. effects of causes 11) Measurement error and other common problems in research (KKV 1994)
Measurement error in quant research – when it makes for big troubles?
Measurement error in qual research – neglect is not a solution 12) Test
Literatura:
BENNETT, A., ELMAN, C. (2007): Case study methods in the international relations subfield Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 40, 2, pp. 170-194
BENNETT, A., ELMAN, C. (2006): Complex Causal Relationship and Case Study Methods: The Example of Path Dependence, Political Analysis, 14, s. 250-267.
BRAUMOELLER, B., GOERTZ, G. (2000): The methodology of necessary conditions. American Journal of Political Science, 44, č. 4, s. 844-858.
CHALMERS, A. (1999): What is the Think Called Science. Hackett Publishing Co.; 3 edition, Indianapolis, 200 s.
COLLIER, D. (2011): Understanding Process Tracing. PS Political science and politics, 44, č. 4, s. 823-830.
ELMAN, C. (2005): Explanatory Typologies in Qualitative Studies of International Politics. International Organization, 59, č. 2, s. 293-326.
FEARON, J. (1991): Counterfactuals and hypothesis testing. World Politics, 43, č. 2, s. 169-195.
FLYVBJERG, B. (2006): Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, č. 2, s. 219-245.
GEORGE, A., BENNETT, A. (2005): Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, 350 s.
GERRING, J. (1999): What Makes a Concept Good? An Integrated Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Sciences. Polity 31, č. 3, s. 357-393.
GERRING, J. (2004): What is a Case Study and What is it Good For? American Political Science Review, 98, č. 2, s. 341-354.
GERRING, J. (2006): Single Outcome Studies, A Methodological Primer, International Sociology, vol. 21, no. 5, s. 707-734.
GERRING, J. (2007): Is There a (Viable) Crucial-Case Method? Comparative Political Studies 40, č. 3, s. 231-53.
GERRING, J., MCDERMOTT, R. (2007): An Experimental Template for Case Study Research, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 51, No.3, s. 688-701.
GERRING, J., SEAWRIGHT, J. (2008): Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research, A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly, 61, no. 2, s. 294-308.
GERRING, J. (2010): Causal Mechanisms: Yes, But…, Comparative Political Studies, vol. 43, no. 11, s. 1499-1526.
GERRING, J. (2012a): Mere Description. British Journal of Political Science , forthcomming, 32 s.
GRYNAVISKI, E. (2012): Contrasts, conterfactuals and causes. European Journal of International Relations, 0(0) forthcomming – s. 1-24.
KING, G., KEOHANE, R., VERBA, S. (1994): Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 300 s.
KOŘAN, M. (2009): Jakou cestou po pozitivismu? Pragmatismus a vědecký realismus a jejich role ve výzkumu mezinárodních vztahů. Mezinárodní vztahy, č. 1, s. 7-36.
LEVY, J. (2008a): Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25, č. 1, s. 1-18.
LEVY, J. (2008b): Counterfactuals and Case Studies. In: Steffensmeier, J., Brady, H., Collier, D. (eds). Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford University Press, New York, s. 627-644.
LIEBERMAN, A. (2005):Nested Analysis, American Political Science Review, 99, č. 3, s. 435-452.
LIJPHART, A. (1971): Comparative Politics and Comparative Method. The American Political Science Review, 65, č. 3, s. 682-693.
MACDONALD, P. (2003): Useful Fiction or Miracle Maker: The Competing Epistemological Foundations of Rational Choice Theory. American Political Science Review, 97, č. 4, s. 551–565.
MAHONEY, J. (2000): Path Dependence in Historical Sociology. Theory and Society, 29, č. 4, s. 507-548.
MAHONEY, J. (2010): After KKV, The New Methodology of Qualitative Research, World Politics, Vol. 62, 1. s. 120-147.
MAHONEY, J., GOERTZ, D. (2004): The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Comparative Research. American Political Science Review, 98, č. 4, s. 653-669.
MONTEIRO, N., RUBY, K. (2009): IR and the False Promise of Philosophical Foundations, International Theory, 1, č. 1, s. 15-48.
RAGIN, C. (1987): Comparative Method, Moving Beyond Qualitative and Qantitative research, University of California Press, Los Angeles, 218 s.
RAGIN, C. (2008): Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. University Of Chicago Press, Chicago, 240 s.
RUZZENE, A. (2012): Drawing Lessons from Case Studies by Enhancing Comparability. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 42, č. 1, s. 99-120.
SAYER, A. (1992): Method in Social Science. Routledge, London, 313 s.
SAYER, A. (2000): Realism and Social Science. Sage Publications, London, 224 s.
Annotation
In 2020/21 the class will take place via ZOOM (conditional on actual Covid situation)!
The course/seminar aims to provide students with neccessary knowledge regarding methodologies employed in modern political science.
In adition the course tries to develop ability of students to productively use various methods for their own reserch.
The winter semester is devoted to general methodological issues and in its second part it focusses on theories, concepts, and essentials of qualitative inquiry.
The second semestr is focused on practical use of quantitative and qualitative methodological tools for research.