Comparative Research Paper: Organization
Research paper time is upon us! As you know, the first draft is due November 20 or December 4,
depending on the date you are assigned. The idea is to treat this as a final draft for your paper—
push as hard as you can in developing the logic and conducting the research on your case(s).
I have talked to many of you in office hours about your papers. I have offered a common piece of
advice that I will reiterate now.
The central task of the research paper is to apply course principles to shed light on different
outcomes across two cases. Thus, the most basic research paper format might look like the
following:
1. Introduction (~2 pages, four paragraphs)
 Identify research question
 Identify empirical cases to be studied
 Explain why reader should care about the paper’s content:
o Are the cases understudied?
o Is it really unclear what the answer to the research question is in these cases?
o Is the question particularly significant?
o Does the answer have a huge bearing on policy? Would Obama care?
 Final introduction paragraph = “roadmap paragraph:”
o ~5 sentences explaining how the paper is going to proceed.
o Includes one or two sentences summarizing each section of the paper.
o Closes with preliminary findings: 1-2 sentences summarizing the paper’s conclusions.
2. Theory (Explaining logic of dominant hypothesis, ~3-4 pages)
 Weave together key concepts from political science readings to explain logic you will
apply to better understand your case.
 Focus is on the hypothesis of interest that you think will best explain the case outcomes.
 Example:
o If your research question is, “When are militaries loyal amid unrest?” you'll want to
spend about three pages or so laying out the logic that underpins your/scholars’
theory as to when militaries are loyal amid unrest.
o You should use subheadings for the main steps in the reasoning chain, to reinforce to
the reader that these are the key links in the theory’s logic.
3. Research Design (Justifying/explaining comparative approach, ~2 pages)
 Identify which cases the paper will compare.
 Justify the comparison:
o How will comparing these cases help you investigate the puzzle?
o Explains how the cases have much in common, but witness different outcomes.
Meaning—If the cases share many of the same variables, you have greater reason to
believe that you are pinpointing the one or two key ways in which they are different,
and in doing so explain the puzzle.
4. Case Studies (Applying logic to explain cases, ~11 pages)
Case Study 1 (5 pages)
 You are going to present us with evidence about the case.
 But, you need to do so in an analytical way; you don’t want to just describe the events.
 To discipline yourself, impose the same subheadings from your logic section to your case
study sections.
Case Study 2 (5 pages)
 You are going to present us with evidence about the case.
 But, you need to do so in an analytical way; you don’t want to just describe the events.
 To discipline yourself, impose the same subheadings from your logic section to your case
study sections.
Summary (1 page)
 That was a lot of material! And you went through two whole cases separately.
 So, do us a favor, summarize the comparison for us.
5. Alternative Explanations (Ruling out other hypotheses, ~3 pages)
 Choose one or two of the alternative hypotheses you identified earlier in the semester.
 For each:
o Explain the hypothesis logic (1-2 paragraphs) then follow with empirics illustrating
how the hypothesis isn’t supported by facts from the cases (1-2 paragraphs).
 Conclude that your hypothesis of interest is stronger than these alternative explanations.
6. Conclusion (~2 pages)
 Summarize the logic you used and how it illuminated the cases (1 paragraph)
 Describe implications of the findings:
o Policy implications?
o Implications for which theories we should use to understand the real world?
o Implications for when we should expect more violence amid conflict?
o Implications for which contexts foster instability?
 Can weigh in on how “generalize-able” the findings are:
o Do we expect to find similar connections in other cases?