Designing Political Enquiry
M14320
(20 credits)/
M14321
Level
4
Taught
Spring Semester
(15 credits)
Module Convenor: Dr Gulshan Khan
Contact details:
Room B120
Law and Social Sciences Building
Office Hours:
Monday 3-4pm
Wednesday 11-12pm
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Content: ......................................................................................... 3
Educational Aims: .............................................................................................. 3
Learning Outcomes: ........................................................................................... 3
Module Evaluation: ............................................................................................. 3
Seminar Titles: .................................................................................................. 4
Week 1
Introduction and overview (w/c 24-01-11) .......................................... 4
Week 2
Theory and political research 1 (w/c 31-01-11).................................... 4
Week 3
Theory and political research 2 (w/c 07-02-11).................................... 4
Week 4
Developing a research project (w/c 14-02-11) ..................................... 4
Week 5
Causal inference in small N research (w/c 21-02-11) ............................ 4
Week 6
Causal inference in case study research (w/c 28-02-11) ....................... 4
Week 7
Documentary, archival and textual analysis (w/c 07.03-11) .................. 4
Week 8
Research proposal session (w/c 14-03-11) .......................................... 4
Week 9
Individual and group interviewing (w/c 21-03-11) ................................ 4
Week 10
Observation and analysing data (w/c 28-03-11) .................................. 4
Week 11
Research Proposal Session (w/c 03-05-11).......................................... 4
Method and Frequency of Class: ........................................................................... 4
Method of Assessment: ....................................................................................... 5
Reading Information: .......................................................................................... 7
Coursework Support: .......................................................................................... 8
Guidance to Essay Writing: .................................................................................. 8
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
2
Summary of Content:
The module is designed to allow students to develop a critical understanding of the
methodological issues involved in designing and undertaking research in the discipline
of politics and international relations and to strengthen their ability to read and
evaluate political science literature more generally. The first part of the module
focuses on issues of research design. It exposes students to a broad range of
methodological issues involved in designing, conducting and writing up research based
on a relative small number of cases in areas of comparative politics, international
relations, political theory and public policy. Topics that are addressed in the module
include issues involved in developing a research question, problems of
conceptualisation, measurement, and strategies and approaches to causal theorising in
small N research. The second part of the module addresses various methods of
generating and processing data for research in politics. Methods that are covered
include the use of documentary sources, textual analysis observation and ethnographic
research, and various forms of interviewing. Throughout the module you will be
developing a feasible research proposal. This requires reading and summarising a
minimum of two articles/book chapters per week on a topic of your choice. This will be
used to inform your dissertation proposal.
Educational Aims:
The module seeks:
 to provide students with an understanding of the stages and issues that are
involved in designing research in political science, international relations and
political theory;
 to encourage students to apply the research design tools for the critical
assessment of literature in political science ;
 to familiarise students with different techniques of generating and processing
data, and to encourage students to critically use and assess these techniques;
 to promote students' ability to develop and design their own research project.
Learning Outcomes:
By the end of the semester, students should
 have developed a critical understanding of the main methodological issues
involved in designing and undertaking political science research;
 be able to apply and critically consider different qualitative methods of
generating data in political science research;
 be able to critically evaluate political science and political theory literature from
a methodological point of view;
 have acquired the basic toolkit to design their own research project.
Module Evaluation:
Evaluation and feedback are crucial to the success of any module. The School wants
students to have their say on Politics modules. Therefore modules are formally
evaluated on a biennial basis, so please use this opportunity to have your say. If you
have any other comments or queries regarding this module, please contact the Module
Convenor.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
3
Seminar Titles:
You are expected to attend the seminars, to prepare for the seminars and to
contribute regularly. The seminars are supposed to provide a setting to critically
discuss and assess the literature listed for each week, and to discuss examples of their
application in different areas of political science. Moreover, you may be given small
assignments applying the method in question in advance of the seminars. The
assignments will eventually be discussed in the seminars. The discussions and
explorations in the seminars do therefore critically depend on your willingness to
actively engage with the module.
Week 1
Introduction and overview (w/c 24-01-11)
Week 2
Theory and political research 1 (w/c 31-01-11)
Week 3
Theory and political research 2 (w/c 07-02-11)
Week 4
Developing a research project (w/c 14-02-11)
Week 5
Causal inference in small N research (w/c 21-02-11)
Week 6
Causal inference in case study research (w/c 28-02-11)
Week 7
Documentary, archival and textual analysis (w/c 07.03-11)
Week 8
Research proposal session (w/c 14-03-11)
Week 9
Individual and group interviewing (w/c 21-03-11)
Week 10
Observation and analysing data (w/c 28-03-11)
Week 11
Research Proposal Session (w/c 03-05-11)
Method and Frequency of Class:
Activity
Lecture
Seminar
Number of Sessions
11
Duration of a Session
2 hours
Location of Seminar I:
Day:
Time:
UP-LASS-A4
Monday
13.00 - 15.00
Location of Seminar II:
Day:
Time:
UP-HEMSLEY-B7
Wednesday
09.00 - 11.00
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
4
Method of Assessment:
This 20 credit/15 credit module will be assessed on the following basis:
Assessment Type
Weight
Requirements
Coursework 1
40%
Coursework 1
60%
1 x 2,000 word critical review
(1 x 1,500 word critical review for 15
credit version)
1 x 3,000 word research report
(1 x 2,500 word research report for 15
credit version)
The assessment for the module consists of two elements (see table above). For the 20
credits version of this module (M14320) students must complete a 2,000 word critical
review (excluding bibliography but including footnotes) and a 3,000 word research
report (again excluding bibliography but including footnotes). The critical review
counts 40 per cent of the final mark and the research report 60 per cent. For the 15
credits version of this module (M14321) students must complete a 1,500 word critical
book review (excluding bibliography but including footnotes) and a 2500 word
research report (again excluding bibliography but including footnotes). The critical
book review counts 40 per cent of the final mark and the research report 60 per cent.
CRITICAL REVIEW
Chose two articles from the following list of journals, and critically evaluate the
methods employed in your chosen articles.
American Journal of Political Science
American Political Science Review
British Journal of Political Science
Comparative Political Studies
Contemporary Political Theory
International Organization
Journal of Politics
Millennium
Philosophy and Social Criticism
Political Studies
Political Theory
World Politics
The main aim of the critical review is to analyze and discuss the research design and
methods employed in the articles that you have chosen. The review will include a short
summary of the main research questions and arguments that are raised in the articles,
and compare and contrast them on key issues such as methods of data collection,
inferences drawn, and ethical considerations. You may also choose a journal that is not
listed below, but you will need the approval of the module convenor.
NB: the articles you chose should ideally have been published in the last 10 -15 years.
Although I recognise that this will not always be possible
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
5
RESEARCH REPORT
For the 'research report', you are required to prepare a research proposal, in which
you
 Develop a research problem;
 Develop and clearly state a research question;
 Develop and formulate hypotheses and consider issues of theory development;
 Discuss and propose a design of your research project, including questions of
conceptualisation, measurement, case selection and inference;
 Discuss and propose methods for undertaking the research project; and
 Outline primary and secondary sources for the conduct of your research project and
provide a bibliography at the end of your proposal.
The deadline for the submission for

The critical review (coursework I) should be submitted to the School Office by
4pm Thursday 10th of March 2011

The research proposal (coursework II) should be submitted to the School Office
by 4pm Wednesday 11th of May 2011
Procedure for submitting the coursework:
1. Submit an electronic copy of your essay via the module’s WebCT site
2. Make sure you take note of the individual ID number that will be generated
once you have successfully uploaded it. This process is self-explanatory.
3. After you have done that – and only then – you must submit two hard copies
of the essay. One submission sheet should be completed and attached to the
top copy of the essay. You are required to enter the WebCT ID number on
the cover sheet, as proof that you have submitted the essay electronically.
4. The submission sheet and the top of page of each copy of your essay should
then be date stamped, and posted in the filing cabinet in front of the School
Office.
5. Failure to complete either process ie. Electronic and/or hard copy
submission will result in late submission penalties being applied
Please note that the School Office will be open from 10am till 4pm (Monday to Friday)
on submission days. Essays handed in after 4pm will be stamped as late and the usual
University penalties will be applied unless an extension has been approved in advance.
Applications for extensions will not normally be considered retrospectively. Any
student wishing to apply for an extension should collect and complete the necessary
forms from the School Office and submit these to the relevant Year Tutor together
with any necessary documentary evidence.
The standard University penalty for late submission should be 5% absolute standard
University scale per normal working day, until the mark reaches zero. For example, an
original mark of 67% would be successively reduced to 62%, 57%, 52%, 47% etc.
Normal working days include vacation periods, but not weekends or public holidays.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
6
The electronic copies will be scanned to detect plagiarism. It is therefore
imperative that you consult the Student Handbook, which outlines what is counted as
plagiarism and advises you how to avoid it. Failure to submit an electronic copy even if
you submit two hard copies on time will mean that the essay will be counted as having
not been submitted.
Plagiarism is a serious offence and University regulations will be applied.
Reading Information:
Several questions are set out at the beginning of each week's reading list. These
questions are designed to illustrate some of the key issues concerning the topic, to
help you prepare individual sessions, and to structure the seminar discussion. The
reading list is divided into two sections. 'Essential Reading' is the central reading for
the topic; it provides an introduction and overview to the topic and has been designed
to provide both several differing and often conflicting viewpoints on the topic. It is
therefore important that students read all or most of these items. The 'Further
Reading' list has two functions: first, to allow students interested in the topic to
deepen their knowledge, especially with respect to the preparation of the individual
research report and the critical book review (see below); second, to offer alternative
sources in the event that essential readings are difficult to obtain.
There is no single course book but the following offer a good introductory and
background reading to the course.
*Della Porta, D. and M. Keating (eds) (2008) Approaches and Methodologies in the
Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. (recommended for purchase).
Bauer, Martin W. and George Gaskell (2000) Qualitative Researching with Text,
Image, and Sound: A Practical Handbook. London: SAGE Publications.
Brady, Henry, and David Collier (eds) (2004) Re-thinking Social Inquiry: Diverse
Tools, Shared Standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers
Bryman, Alan (2007) Social Research Methods. 3rd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Burnham, Peter, Kathryn Gillard, Wyn Grant, and Zig Layton-Henry (2004) Research
Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Dunleavy, Patrick (2003) Authoring a PhD: How to Plan, Draft, Write and Finish a
Doctoral Thesis or Dissertation. London: Palgrave.
*Geddes, Barbara (2003) Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research
Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
George, Alexander, and Andrew Bennett (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development
in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gerring, John (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gerring, John (2007) Case Study Research. Principles and Practices. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gilbert, Nigel. ed. (2001) Researching Social Life, 2nd Ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Goertz, Gary (2006) Social Science Concepts. A User’s Guide. Princeton University
Press.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
7
Gschwend, Thomas, and Frank Schimmelfennig (eds) (2007) Research Design in
Political Science. How to Practice What They Preach. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, Sidney Verba (1994) Designing Social Inquiry:
Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Ragin, Charles (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and
Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Ragin, Charles (1994) Constructing Social Research: The Unity and Diversity of
Method. Thousand Oaks: Northwestern University Press.
Ragin, Charles C. (2000) Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Van Evera, Stephen (1997) Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Coursework Support:
The Hallward Library and Halls of Residence have a number of networked PCs to
facilitate access to information on holdings.
As Module Convenor please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any difficulties
with the module or assessed work. I will be available without appointment during my
office hours. Appointments to meet at other times can be made by calling me on my
direct line or via email. My contact details together with office hours are noted at the
front of this module outline.
Guidance to Essay Writing:
A short guide for students on essay writing skills and an outline of the marking criteria
used by staff is available on the School intranet.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
8
Week 1 Introduction and Overview
Week 2 Theory and Political Research 1
Issues and Questions
This session introduces students to key concepts and methodological approaches in
undertaking political research.
 What do you understand by the terms epistemology, ontology, positivism, realism
and interpretivism?
 What role, if any, does ontology and epistemology play in research strategy?
 Identify two different theoretical approaches to research and assess their
respective methodological perspectives.
 What is the difference between methods and methodology?
 What is the difference between inductive and deductive theory?
 Identify differences between quantitative and qualitative approaches to research.
Essential Readings
Bryman, Alan (2001) Social Research Methods. Second Edition, Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Ch 1 pp 3-25
Marsh, D. and G. Stoker, Eds. (2002). Theory and Methods in Political Science.
Second Edition Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. Ch 1
Marsh, D. and G. Stoker, Eds. (2002). Theory and Methods in Political Science.
Second Edition Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. Ch 6 and Ch 9
Further Reading
Bennett Andrew, Aharon Barth, and Ken Rutherford (2003), “Do we Preach What
we Practice? A survey of Methods in Journals and Graduate Curricula,” PS: Political
Science and Politics 36 (July), 373–378.
Chalmers Alan F. (1999), What Is This Thing Called Science? (Hackett Publishing)
Ch 1-10
Lin Ann Chih, "Bridging Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Qualitative
Methods," Policy Studies Journal 26:1(1998): 162-180.
Bennett Andrew, “A Lakatosian Reading of Lakatos: What Can we Salvage from the
Hard Core?,” in Colin and Miriam Elman, Progress in International Relations Theory:
Metrics and Methods of Scientific Change, MIT Press 2001.
George, Alexander, and Andrew Bennett (2005) Case Studies and Theory
Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, preface to Case
Studies and Theory Development (MIT Press).
Hempel Carl G., "The Function of General Laws in History" Journal of Philosophy 39
(1942), pp. 35-48. ejournal
Keohane, King, and Verba (hereafter KKV), Designing Social Inquiry pp. 3-33, 99114.
Taylor Charles, "Interpretation and the Sciences of Man,” in Paul Rabinow and
William Sullivan, Interpretive Social Science: A Second Look, pp. 33-81.
Van Evera Stephen, Guide to Methodology for Students of Political Science, pp. 89121.
Geertz Clifford, The Interpretation of Cultures, (Basic, 1973), Ch. 1. HM101.G4
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
9
Feldman Martha S.. Strategies for interpreting qualitative data. (Sage, 1995),
chapters 1 and 3. HM131.F4
Week 3 Theory and Political Research 2
Issues and Questions
This session introduces students to key theoretical approaches in undertaking
research in political science, international relations and political theory.
 Identify whether you going to do a MA dissertation in political science,
international relations and political theory?
 Draw a table outlining the main theoretical approaches of the sub-discipline you
have identified with.
 Identify which theoretical approach you are going to use and justify your choice.
 Explain why you are not using the alternative theoretical approaches.
 What is the ontology and epistemology of your approach?
Essential Readings
Marsh, D. and G. Stoker, Eds. (2002). Theory and Methods in Political Science. Second
Edition Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. Ch 6 and Ch 9
Further Readings
Baylis, J., Owens, P. and Smith, S. (eds) (2005) The Globalization of World Politics:
An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Brown, C. and Kirsten, A (2009) Understanding International Relations 4th edition.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Burchill, S. et al (2009) Theories of International Relations 4th edition. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Leopold, D and Stears, M (eds) (2008) Political Theory: Methods and Approaches.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Marsh, D. and G. Stoker, Eds. (2002). Theory and Methods in Political Science. Second
Edition Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
Monroe, K.R (eds) (1997) Contemporary Empirical Political Theory. Berkeley:
University Of California Press.
Steans, J. et al (2010) International relations: perspective and themes 3rd edition .
London: Longman.
Tully, J. (eds) (1989) Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
10
Week 4 Developing a Research Project
Issues and Questions
This session provides an overview of the challenges in designing research in political
science. It discusses the research cycle from choosing a topic to designing, conducting
and delivering the results of your research. The session puts particular emphasis on
the issues of selecting a research topic and developing a research question, both of
which are important for the preparation of your research proposal. Moreover, the
lecture will address the role of a literature review in preparing and writing a research
proposal.
Key issues that will be addressed include
 What is a research design and what are the different types of research design?
 What is a research question and how do I develop a 'good' research question?
 How does the research question I choose affect the answer I get?
 What is a literature review and what is its purpose?
 Why are we concerned with the formation of concepts and what criteria should we
take into account in order to form 'good' concepts?
 What are classifications, typologies and indices?
 What common pitfalls of concept formation can be identified and how can they be
avoided?
 What is causation and what conceptions of causation can we distinguish?
 What is inference and what is the difference between descriptive and causal
inference?



Questions
What are the key concepts of your research proposal?
Provide an etymology/history of the different ways in which your key concepts have
been used in your discipline.
How do you intend to use your concept? Justify your answer.
Bring to the seminar
Essential Readings
*Mair, P. (2008) Concepts and Concept Formation. In D. Della Porta and M. Keating
(eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences. CUP.
Geddes, Barbara (2003) Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research
Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Chs
1-2.
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, Sidney Verba (1994) Designing Social Inquiry:
Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press. Ch 1.
Gerring, John (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Chs 3-4.
Examples of concept formation, typologies and classifications in action:
Lijphart, A (1999) Patterns of Democracy. New Haven: Yale University. Read Chs 1-3.
Lijphart, A (ed.) (1992) Parliamentary versus Presidential Government. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, Introduction by Lijphart
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
11
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, Sidney Verba (1994) Designing Social Inquiry:
Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press. Chs 2-3. For the critique check out the debate in APSR (1995) and the
chapters in Brady/Collier (2004), see below.
Lijphart, Arend (1971) Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method. American
Political Science Review 65(3): 682-693. (e-journal).
Task: Read the introduction only of the following articles and identify the research
topic, the research question(s), the research problem (why does the question matter),
and the argument of the articles.
McNamera, K (2002) ‘The Diffusion of Central bank Independence as an Organization
Form’, West European Politics 25(1) (e-journal)
Schmidt, VA (2002) Does Discourse Matter in the Politics of Welfare State
Adjustment?. Comparative Political Studies 35(2): 168-193 (e-journal).
Steinmo, S, and Tolbert, CJ (1998) Do Institutions really Matter? Taxation in
Industrialized Democracies. Comparative Political Studies 31(2): 165-187 (ejournal).
Further Reading (Searching Literature and Doing a Literature Review)
*Della Porta, D. and M. Keating (eds) (2008) Approaches and Methodologies in the
Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. Chapter by Schmitter.
Brady, H, and D Collier (eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tool, Shared
Standards. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield. Check p. 37; if you feel like it read
the entire Ch 2 (Collier/Seawright/Munck).
Bryman, Alan (2007) Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Part
One.
Dawson, Heather (2003) Using the Internet for Political Research: Practical Tips and
Hints. Oxford: Chandos.
Dunleavy, Patrick (2003) Authoring a PhD: How to Plan, Draft, Write and Finish a
Doctoral Thesis or Dissertation. London: Palgrave.
Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.co.uk/)
Hart, Chris (2001) Doing a Literature Search. London: SAGE Publications.
IBSS International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (access via EBSCO-HOST) (An
IBSS-research is an excellent way of searching literature that might be relevant
for your research project!).
Van Evera, Stephen (1997) Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press. Chs 1, 3-4.
Weber, Max [1919] (1948) Science as a Vocation. In From Max Weber: Essays in
Sociology. H.H. Gerth, and C.Wright Mills. eds. London: Routledge.
Further Reading (Concept formation and inference)
American Political Science Review Vol. 89, No. 2, June 1995. Symposium on the
Qualitative-Quantitative Disputation: Gary King, Robert O. Keohane, Sidney
Verba's Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research,
pp. 454-481. (e-journal).
*Della Porta, D. and M. Keating (eds) (2008) Approaches and Methodologies in the
Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. Chapter by Mair (see above).
*Della Porta, D. and M. Keating (eds) (2008) Approaches and Methodologies in the
Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. Chapter by Heritier.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
12
Sartori, G (1984) Guidelines for Concept Analysis. In Social Science Concepts: A
Systematic Analysis. Beverley Hills: SAGE, pp. 15-48.
Sartori, Giovanni (1991) Comparing and Miscomparing. Journal of Theoretical Politics
3(3): 243-257. (copy available from JMS)
Bailey, Kenneth D. (1994) Typologies and Taxonomies: An Introduction to
Classification Techniques. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Brady, H, and D Collier (eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tool, Shared
Standards. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield. Chs 2 – 5 and 10 – 12.
Burnham, Peter, Kathryn Gillard, Wyn Grant, and Zig Layton-Henry (2004) Research
Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ch 3.
Campbell, D and J Stanley (1966) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for
Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Theory. John H. Goldthorpe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 137-160.
Collier, David, and Steven Levitsky (1997) Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual
Innovations in Comparative Research. World Politics 49: 430-51. (e-journal).
Collier, David, and James E. Mahony (1993) Conceptual 'Stretching' Revisited:
American Political Science Review 87(4): 845-855. (e-journal).
Collier, David (1993) The Comparative Method. In Political Science: The State of the
Discipline II. Ada W. Finifter. ed. Washington, DC: The American Political
Science Association, pp. 105-120. (Evaluates Lijphart’s (1971) article taking into
account recent developments).
Collier, David, and Robert Adcock (1999) Democracy and Dichotomies: A Pragmatic
Approach to Choices about Concepts. Annual Review of Political Science 2: 537565. (e-journal).
Cook, T and D Campbell (1979) Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for
Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Elkins, Z (2000) Gradations of Democracy? Empirical Tests of Alternative
Conceptualisations. American Journal of Political Science 44(2) (e-journal).
Gerring, John (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Chs 6-7.
Goldthorpe, John H. (2000) Causation, Statistics, and Sociology. In On Sociology:
Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Green, D and A
Gerber (2001) Reclaiming the Experimental Tradition in Political Science. In
Political Science: The State of the Discipline. 3rd Ed, Ira Katznelson and Helen
Milner (eds).
Marsh, Michael, and Gerry Stoker. eds. (2002) Theory and Methods in Political
Science, 2nd Ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ch 9
McDermott (2002) Experimental Research in Political Science. Annual Political Science
Review 5: 31-61. (e-journal).
Pennings, Paul, Hans Keman, and Jan Kleinnijenhuis (1999) Doing Research in Political
Science: An Introduction to Comparative Methods and Statistics. London: SAGE
Publications. Chs 1-2.
Peters, B. Guy (1998) Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods. Basingstoke:
Macmillan Press. Chs. 1-3.
Peters, B. Guy (1998) Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods. Basingstoke:
Macmillan Press. Ch 4.
Przeworski, Adam, and Henry Teune (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry.
New York: Wiley.
Ragin, Charles (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and
Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
13
Sartori, Giovanni (1970) Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics. American
Political Science Review 64(4): 1033-1053. (e-journal).
Stinchcombe, Arthur L. (1968) Constructing Social Theories. New York: Harcourt
Brace.
Week 5 Causal Inference in Small-N Research
Issues and Questions
 How can we draw inference in small-N research?
 How can we design our research in a way that we achieve conditions for valid
causal inference?
 How should we select cases for inclusion in a study?
 What are the sources of selection bias and inefficiency, how do they affect the
results of our research and how can we avoid these problems?
Essential reading
Mahony, James (2000) Strategies of Causal Inference in Small-N Analysis. Sociological
Methods & Research 28(4) 387-424. (e-journal).
Geddes, Barbara (2003) Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research
Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Ch
on selection bias
Ragin, Charles C., and Howard S. Becker (1992) What is a Case? Exploring the
Foundations of Social Inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ch by
Lieberson, reprinted from (1991) in Social Forces.
Small-N research in action.
Schimmelfennig, Frank, Stefan Engert, and Heiko Knobel (2003) Costs, Commitment
and Compliance: The Impact of EU Democratic Conditionality on Latvia, Slovakia
and Turkey. Journal of Common Market Studies 41(3). (e-journal).
Further Reading
*Della Porta, D. and M. Keating (eds) (2008) Approaches and Methodologies in the
Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. Chapter 11 by Della Porta.
Brady, H, and D Collier (eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tool, Shared
Standards. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield. Ch 6.
Braumoeller, Bear F., and Gary Goertz (2000) The Methodology of Necessary
Conditions. American Journal of Political Science 44(4): 844-858. (e-journal).
Burnham, Peter, Kathryn Gillard, Wyn Grant, and Zig Layton-Henry (2004) Research
Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ch 6.
Collier, David (1993) The Comparative Method. In Political Science: The State of the
Discipline II. Ada W. Finifter. ed. Washington, DC: The American Political
Science Association, pp. 105-120.
Collier, David, and James Mahony (1996) Insights and Pitfalls: Selection Bias in
Qualitative Research. World Politics 49(1): 56-91. (e-journal).
Coppedge (1999) Thinking Thin Concepts and Theories: Combining Large N and Small
in Comparative Politics. Comparative Politics 31(4): 465-76. (e-journal).
DeFelice, Gene (1980) Comparison Misconceived: Common Nonsense in Comparative
Politics. Comparative Politics 13:119-126(e-journal).
Dion, Douglas (1998) Evidence and Inference in the Comparative Case Study.
Comparative Politics 30(2): 127-145. (e-journal).
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
14
George, Alexander, and Andrew Bennett (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development
in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ch 8.
King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, Sidney Verba (1994) Designing Social Inquiry:
Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press. Chs 4-5.
Lijphart, Arend (1971) Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method. American
Political Science Review 65(3): 682-693. (e-journal).
Lijphart, Arend (1975) The Comparable-Cases Strategy in Comparative Research.
Comparative Political Studies 8(2): 158-177.
Pennings, Paul, Hans Keman, and Jan Kleinnijenhuis (1999) Doing Research in Political
Science: An Introduction to Comparative Methods and Statistics. London: SAGE
Publications. Ch 3.
Peters, B. Guy (1998) Comparative Politics: Theory and Methods. Basingstoke:
Macmillan Press. Chs. 1-3.
Przeworski, Adam, and Henry Teune (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry.
New York: Wiley. Chs 2-3.
Rose, Richard (1991) Comparing Forms of Comparative Analysis. Political Studies 39:
446-462.
Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA, Medium N analysis)
Ragin, Charles (2000) Fuzzy-Sets Social Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press. Esp. 120-45, 203-308.
An example of QCA in action
Schimmelfennig, F (2004) The Impact of EU Democratic Conditionality in Central and
Eastern Europe: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Paper presented at ECPR
Second Pan-European Conference, Bologna, 24-26 June 2004. [google it]
Week 6 Causal Inference in Case Study Research
Issues and Questions
 What is a case study and what kind of case studies can we distinguish?
 To what extent and what techniques do we have available to draw causal inference
from case study research?
 What is process tracking?
Essential Reading
George, A, and A Bennett (2004) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social
Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press. Chs 1, 7, 10. Chs 9&10 are highly
recommended.
Gerring, John (2004) What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? American
Political Science Review 98(2): 341-354. (e-journal).
Case Study research in action: Tracing EU Eastern Enlargement
Schimmelfennig, Frank (2003) Strategic Action in a Community Environment. The
Decision to Enlarge the European Union to the East. Comparative Political
Studies 36 (1/2): 156-183. (e-journal).
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
15
Further Reading
*Della Porta, D. and M. Keating (eds) (2008) Approaches and Methodologies in the
Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press. Chapter by Vennesson.
Achen, Christopher H., and Duncan Snidal (1989) Rational Deterrence Theory and
Comparative Case Studies. World Politics 41(2): 143-169. (e-journal).
Brady, H, and D Collier (eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tool, Shared
Standards. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield. Ch 7.
Eckstein, Harry (1975) Case Study and Theory in Political Science. In Handbook of
Political Science: Strategies of Inquiry (Vol 7). Fred I. Greestein, and Nelson W.
Polsby. eds. Reading, MA: pp. 79-137.
Geddes, Barbara (2003) Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research
Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Ch
4.
Gerring, John (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Ch 9, esp. pp. 215-229.
Gerring, John (2007) Case Study Research. Principles and Practices. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hedstroem, Peter, and Richard Swedberg (1998) Social Mechanisms: An Introductory
Essay. In Social Mechanisms: An Analytical Approach to Social Theory. Peter
Hedstroem, and Richard Swedberg. eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 1-31.
Mahony, James, and Dietrich Rueschemeyer (2002) Comparative Historical Analysis in
the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (selected
chapters)
Ragin, Charles C., and Howard S. Becker (1992) What is a Case? Exploring the
Foundations of Social Inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Introduction (pp. 1-18).
Skocpol, Theda, and Margaret Somers (1980) The Uses of Comparative History in
Macrosocial Inquiry. Comparative Studies in society and History 22: 174-197.
(e-journal).
Skocpol, Theda. ed. (1984) Vision and Method in Historical Sociology. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Van Evera, Stephen (1997) Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press. Ch 2.
Yin, Robert K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Method. 3rd Ed. Thousand
Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Week 7 Documentary, Archival and Textual Analysis
Please submit a three-page draft outline of your research proposal in the
seminar!
Questions
 What kind of documentary sources can we distinguish and what benefits and
problems arise from using documentary sources?
 Why use historical and archival evidence in political science research?
 What is 'content analysis', how does it work, and what are the strengths and
weaknesses of using content analysis as a research method?
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
16
Essential Reading
*Charteris-Black, J (2006) ‘Britain as a container: immigration metaphors in the 2005
election campaign’ Discourse and Society, 17, pp.563-581.
*Jonathan Flairclough, N (2005) ‘Blair’s contribution to elaborating a new doctrine of
international community’. Journal of Language and Politics 4, pp. 41-63
Bauer, Martin W. (2000) Classical Content Analysis: A Review. In Qualitative
Researching with Text, Image and Sound: A Practical Handbook. Martin W.
Bauer, and George Gaskell. eds. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 131-151.
Bryman, Alan (2008) Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chs
21 & 26.
Gilbert, Nigel. ed. (2001) Researching Social Life, 2nd Ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Ch 12 by Macdonald.
Task: In preparation of the seminar, create a list of different types of documentary
material that you expect to use in your dissertation (or research proposal).
Further Reading
Althaus, Scott L., Jill A Edy, and Patricia F. Phalen (2001) Using Substitutes for FullText New Stories in Content Analysis: Which Text Is Best? American Journal of
Political Science 45: 707-724. (e-journal).
Burnham, Peter, Kathryn Gillard, Wyn Grant, and Zig Layton-Henry (2004) Research
Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ch 7.
Lustick, Ian S. (1996) History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical
Records and the Problems of Selection Bias. American Political Science Review
90: 605-618. (e-journal).
McCullagh, C. Behan (2000) Bias in Historical Description, Interpretation, and
Explanation. History and Theory 39: 39-66. (e-journal).
Platt, Jennifer (1981) Evidence and Proof in Documentary Research. Sociological
Review 29(1): 31-66. (e-journal).
Scott, John (1990) A Matter of Record: Documentary Sources in Social Research.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
The Political Methodologist Vol. 8, No. 1. Fall 1997. Does Historicasl Political Research
Pose any Special Methodological Concerns?, pp. 8-21. [google it]
Weber, Robert P. (1990) Basic Content Analysis. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.
Woolley, John T. (2000) Using Media-Based Data in Studies of Politics. American
Journal of Political Science 44: 156-173. (e-journal).
Week 8 Research Proposal Session
In this session, we will have a workshop where we will discuss your draft research
proposals based on the three-page outlines that you have submitted in week 7.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
17
Week 9 Individual and Group Interviewing
Issues and Questions
 Why interview political actors and what research goals can be advanced?
 What kind of interviews can we distinguish and what are their strengths and
weaknesses?
 What is the balance between structure and improvisation when interviewing? To
what extent can we establish a clear set of rules or 'canons' for doing good
interviews?
 What is a focus group? How does it work? What is it good for? How is it different
from one-on-one interview? What factors contribute to a successful focus group
interview?
Essential Reading
Bauer, Martin W., and George Gaskell. eds. (2000) Qualitative Researching with Text,
Image and Sound: A Practical Handbook. London: SAGE Publications. Ch 3 by
Gaskell. Chs 4&5 by Jovchelovitch/Bauer and by Flick are optional.
Bryman, Alan (2008) Social Research Methods. 3rd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. Ch 8, 18-19.
Gilbert, Nigel. ed. (2001) Researching Social Life, 2nd Ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Chs 8 by Fielding and Thomas, and 10 by Cronin.
PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 35, No. 4, December 2002. Special Issue on
Interview Methods in Political Science. [apsa.net]
Further Reading
Lilleker, Darren (2003) Interviewing the Political Elite: Navigating a Potential Minefield.
Politics 23(3): 207-214.
Becker, Theodore, and Peter Meyers (1974/1975) Empathy and Bravado: Interviewing
Reluctant Bureaucrats. Public Opinion Quarterly 38(4): 605-613. (e-journal).
Burnham, Peter, Kathryn Gillard, Wyn Grant, and Zig Layton-Henry (2004) Research
Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ch 9.
Kvale, S (1996) InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. More advanced treatment of qualitative
interviewing.
Morgan, David L. (1997) Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. 2nd Ed. London: SAGE:
Publications.
Morgan, David L. ed. (1993) Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art.
Newbury Park: SAGE Publications. Ch 1 by Morgan/Krueger.
Peabody, Robert L. et al. (1990) Interviewing Political Elites. PS: Political Science and
Politics 23: 451-55. (e-journal).
Richard, David (1996) Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls. Politics 16(3) : 199204.
Rubin, Herbert J., and Irene S. Rubin (1995) Qualitative Interviewing. The Art of
Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. This is an accessible
Introduction to qualitative interviewing.
Silverman, David (2001) Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk,
Text and Interaction. London: SAGE Publications. Ch 5.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
18
Week 10 Observation and analyzing data
Issues and Questions
 What can we learn by talking to people and observing them and what are we not
likely to learn?
 Why is observational field research simple, but at the same time immensely
complicated?
 What sampling technique can be used in (participant) observation?
 How should you go about recording and analysing data in (participant)
observation?
 How can we analyse empirical data?
 How can we measure concepts?
 How can we address problems of measurement validity?
Essential Reading
Bryman, Alan (2008) Social Research Methods. 3rd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. Ch 17.
Gilbert, Nigel. ed. (2001) Researching Social Life, 2nd Ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Ch 9 by Fielding.
Observation-based research in action
Fenno, Richard Jr. (1986) Observation, Context, and Sequence in the Study of Politics.
American Political Science Review 80(1): 3-15.
Fenno, Richard Jr. (1990) Watching Politicians: Essays on Participant Observation.
Berkeley: IGS Press. Ch 3.
Bryman, Alan (2007) Social Research Methods. 3rd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. Ch 22.
Example of questionnaire design, content analysis of interviews and construction of an
index. Material will be handed out before the session.
Kopecky, P. et al (2007) Party Patronage in New Democracies: Concepts, Measures
and the Design of Empirical Inquiry. Paper prepared for Party Patronage
Workshop, European University Institute, Florence, 22-23 November, 2007.
Meyer-Sahling, J-H., and K. Jáger (2008) Party Patronage in Hungary. Paper prepared
for Workshop on Party Patronage in Europe, Leiden University, December 2008.
Further Reading
Adcock, Robert, and David Collier (2001) Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for
Qualitative and Quantitative Research. American Political Science Review 95(3):
529-546. (e-journal).
Angrosino, Michael, and Kimberley Mays de Perez (2000) Rethinking Observation:
From Method to Context. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Norman K.
Denzin, and Yvonna S. Linclon. eds. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, pp.
673-702.
Burgess, Robert G. (1982) Field Research: A Source Book and Field Manual. London:
Allen and Unwin.
Burgess, Robert G. (1984) In the Field: An Introduction to Field Research. London:
Allen & Unwin.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
19
Burnham, Peter, Kathryn Gillard, Wyn Grant, and Zig Layton-Henry (2004) Research
Methods in Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Ch 10.
Geertz, Clifford (1973) Thick Desciption: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In
The Interpretation of Cultures. Clifford Geertz. New York, pp. 3-32.
Goertz, Gary (2006) A Checklist for Constructing, Evaluating, and Using Concepts
or Quantitative Measures. In Box-Steffensmeier, J., and H. Brady and D.
Collier (eds.) The Oxford handbook of political methodology. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Hammersley, Martyn, and Paul Atkinson (1994) Ethnography: Principles and Practice.
2nd Ed. London: Routledge.
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Allen H. Barton (1951) Qualitative Measurement in the Social
Sciences: Classifications, Typologies, and Indices. In The Policy Sciences:
Recent Developments in Scope and Methods. Daniel Lerner, and Harold D.
Lasswell. eds. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 155-192.
Mason, Jennifer (2002) Qualitative Researching. 2nd Ed. London: SAGE Publications. Ch
5
Munck, Gerardo, and Jay Verkuilen (2002) Conceptualising and Measuring Democracy:
Evaluating Alternative Indices. Comparative Political Studies 35(1): 5-34. (ejournal).
Silverman, David (2001) Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk,
Text and Interaction. London: SAGE Publications. Ch 3.
Week 11 Dissertation Proposal Session
Issues and Questions
The purpose of this session is to provide you with an opportunity to present your work
via a 10-minute power point presentation to the rest of the group. There will be a fiveminute question and answer session for each presentation.
M14320/321 Designing Political Enquiry
2010/11
20