University of Warwick
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
INTRODUCTION TO
RESEARCH METHODS
(PO 102)
MODULE GUIDE 2006/7
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/staff/grant/irm/
MODULE DIRECTORS
Professor Wyn Grant
Room B1.06 (Social Studies)
E-mail: W.P.Grant@warwick.ac.uk
Office Hours: Tues 2-3; Thurs 2-3
Tel: 02476 523720
Professor Zig Layton-Henry
Room B0.08 (Social Studies)
E-mail: Z.Layton-Henry@warwick.ac.uk
Office Hours: Wed 10-11; Thurs 11-12
Tel: 02476 572858
Contents
Page
Introduction
1
Aims and learning objectives
2
How this module is organised
3
Assessed essays and project report
4
Module requirements
6
The Warwick skills certificate
7
Reading and researching
8
Seminar discussion topics and reading lists
9
Introduction
Research Methods in Political Science is an introductory module to the research process in
Political Science. It is a core module for all first-year students taking Politics, and Politics
with International Studies. The module is structured around the following topics:
•
the nature of the discipline of Political Science
•
social surveys and election studies
•
the process of research design
•
the role of theory in the research process
•
concepts and measurements in political science
•
focus groups
•
elite interviewing
•
participant observation
•
ethical problems in social research
•
the use of the internet in political research
Lecturer/tutor availability
You are encouraged to consult your seminar tutors during their specified office hours
about any questions or problems you may have. The module directors are also available
for you to consult. If you are unable to come in office hours, please make an appointment
by email. The module directors and tutor are as follows:
•
Professor W Grant, Module Director, Room B1.06, Social Studies
Office hours: Tuesdays 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm; Thursdays 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm
email: w.p.grant@warwick.ac.uk
Tel: 23720
•
Professor Z Layton-Henry, Module Director, Room B0.08, Social Studies
Office hours: Wednesdays 10.00 am - 11.00 am; Thursdays 11.00 am – 12.00 noon
email: z.layton-henry@warwick.ac.uk
Tel: 72858
•
Dr. Justin Greaves, Module Tutor, email: j.greaves@warwick.ac.uk
•
Dr Renske Doorenspleet, Lecturer, Room 0.14., r.doorenspleet@warwick.ac.uk
Organisation of the lectures and seminars
The module is taught through one weekly lecture and one weekly seminar. The lectures
take place on Wednesdays at 9.00-10.00 am in room Library 1. The lectures provide an
introduction and overview of the topic under discussion and the seminars explore the
arguments in more detail and with reference to key texts in Political Science. Seminar
groups and times are arranged in Week I and posted on the first-year noticeboard and the
module website.
1
2
Aims and learning objectives
Aims
The module will:

Offer an introduction to the development of Political Science
as a discipline and explain the defining characteristics of an
academic discipline.

Introduce the principal qualitative research methods and
techniques used in Political Science and their advantages and
limitations.

Offer an introduction to the use of quantitative methods in
political research and their role as a complement to
qualitative methods

Identify some of the main ethical problems that arise in
Political Science and international relations research.

Analyse how effectively different research methods have
been used in major academic publications in Political
Science.
Learning objectives

To appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of the principal
research methods used in the study of Politics.

Be familiar with the process of research design and the
major stages that are involved in designing a research
proposal.

To acquire a basic understanding of how quantitative
approaches may be deployed in the study of politics and
international relations.

To understand the ethical dilemmas that arise in the research
process and strategies available for resolving them.

To develop presentation skills as a result of the requirement
for prepared work to be presented in seminars to stimulate
group discussions.

To acquire enhanced capability to use the Internet for
information gathering purposes.
3
How this module is organised
Weekly lectures provide a general overview of the subject matter of the module. In
addition, in terms of the essays on declining turnout in British elections and project reports
on the effectiveness of pressure groups (see pages 4-6), they provide an in-depth analysis
of some of the key issues arising in relation to each topic.
Weekly seminars provide an opportunity for detailed discussion of the lecture topics and
later in this module booklet, along with the individual reading lists for each topic, we also
provide a list of key questions to help you to prepare for the seminars. Please regard the
seminars as an opportunity to raise anything that you have not understood in the lectures.
In addition to attendance at lectures and seminars, you should spend 8-10 hours per week
on your own independent study for this module. The lecture topics will cover the
following themes:
Autumn term
1. Welcome, administration and introduction to the subject area: world political science
2. The discipline of politics
3. Research design
4. Concepts and measurements in the discipline of Politics: the example of democracy
5. Quantitative analyses in the discipline of Politics
6. Reading week
7. Models of voting behaviour
8. The role of theory in the research process
9. The 2005 British General Election and the Downs model of voting
10. Researching turnout in recent British general elections
Spring Term
1. Social surveys in political research
2. Participant observation
3. Ethical issues in social research
4. Elite interviewing
5. Focus groups
6. Reading week
7. Documentary analysis
8. Using the internet for research
9. Researching pressure groups (1)
10. Researching pressure groups (2)
Summer Term
1. Researching pressure groups (3)
4
Assessed essays and project report
During the year you will prepare two assessed essays, and one project report the
departmental undergraduate office as follows (you must retain an electronic copy to be
made available if necessary for plagiarism investigations):
Essay 1 (approx 2,500 words to be submitted by 12 noon on Thursday 23 November 2006)
Either:
What are the distinctive features of the discipline of politics in Britain
and the United States?
or:
Is the study of political science and international relations too
dominated by advanced industrial countries in the north?
or:
What are the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative measures of
democracy?
or:
How important is research design in the development of a research
project?
Essay 2 (approx 2,500 words to be submitted by 12 noon on Thursday 22 February
2007)
Either: Why is elite interviewing regarded as a research technique of particular
relevance to politics? Discuss its particular strengths and limitations in
relation to political research.
or
Why did turnout decline substantially between the British general
elections of 1997 and 2001 and recover a little in 2005? Why is there
such a strong contrast between the turnout of the youngest and oldest
cohorts of voters?
or
How far does the Downs model of voting help to explain the result of the
British General Election of 2005?
or:
Critically assess the research methods used in one of the following:
a) Whyte, W.F., Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian
Slum, fourth edition, University of California Press, 1993.
b) Burton, F., The Politics of Legitimacy: Struggles in a Belfast
Community, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978.
c) Humphreys, L., The Tearoom Trade, Duckworth, 1970.
d) Okely, J., The Traveller Gypsies, Cambridge University Press, 1983.
e) Taylor, A., Women Drug Users: An Ethnography of a Female Injecting
Community Clarendon Press, 1993.
5
f) Putnam, R. with Leonardi, R. and Raffaella, Y.N., Making Democracy
Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton University Press,
1993.
Project report (approx. 3,000 words to be submitted by 12 noon on Thursday 3 May 2007)
The project is to gather data from the Internet and use it for analytical purposes. First, you
should select a British or EU level pressure group that it is of interest to you. (For the
purposes of this study, a pressure group is an organisation that seeks to influence
government policy). Second, you should check that this pressure group has a web site.
You should then write a report on the following:
i)
What does the web site cover? How useful is it to someone trying to find out
about the organisation? What improvements would you suggest in either design
or content?
ii) How effective does the pressure group appear to be? What are the main factors,
which make it more or less effective? (For this part of the question you may need
to use material other than on the group’s web site, including accessing other web
sites. You will be given credit for discussing the methodological problems that
arise in the study of pressure group effectiveness).
Marking and schedule adherence
Marks will be split as follows:
Essay 1
30% of total
Essay 2
35% of total
Project report
35% of total
Should you not obtain a pass mark (40) in this module you will be required to sit a timed
examination.
6
Module requirements
Please note that on this module you are required to submit all three pieces of assessed
work. A failure to do so (unless there are medical or other extenuating
circumstances) will lead to the return of a mark of 0 for the module.
Essays will incur a deduction of three percentage points for each twenty-four hour period
that they are late. Extensions will only be given on production of medical evidence or for
other good reasons such as serious family problems.
Requests for extensions should be referred to Professor Zig Layton-Henry, Room B0.08,
ext. 72858, email: z.layton-henry@warwick.ac.uk
Rule 13
‘Failure to attend prescribed classes or to complete prescribed course work may result
in a student being required to submit additional assessed work, or to sit a written
examination in place of submitted coursework, or in the student being required to
withdraw from his/her course of study.’
(Regulation 13.1, (Section 1), University Calendar)
Referencing and plagiarism
There are severe penalties for cheating of any kind in all forms of University test.
Plagiarism is a form of cheating, as it attempts to acquire a benefit from the work of others
unfairly. The Department’s policy on plagiarism is fully explained the PAIS Undergraduate Handbook, available both in hard copy and on the PAIS website. The Handbook
explains how the University’s published regulation may be accessed on the web. If you
are in any doubt about what constitutes plagiarism, you should consult your personal tutor
or module director before submitting written work.
The PAIS plagiarism committee will submit all assessed work for a number of
modules to plagiarism detection software. No announcement about the identity of
these modules will be made.
7
The Warwick Skills Certificate (WSC)
This a University of Warwick qualification designed to develop your competence and
confidence in a range of essential graduate-level skills. Taking the WSC will help you to
improve skills you already have and develop new ones. It is a free-standing accredited
programme, and can be taken in addition to your degree programme.
There is a wide range of modules to choose from and you can select the combination that
is right for you. You need to complete six modules to gain the whole award, but you can
take as many or as few as you like in any year, and providing you complete these
successfully, they will appear on your transcript and you can include them in your CV.
Further information and registration details on the Warwick Skills Certificate can also be
found at www.warwick.ac.uk/skills
8
Reading and researching
Subject to the legal requirements of copyright law, copies of all core reading are available
in the Student Reserve Collection (SRC) in the Library. In the event that a reading cannot
be placed in the SRC for legal reasons, alternative arrangements will be made. In any
event, if a core reading is not available in the SRC you should consult your tutor
immediately.
Key module text
We expect all students to purchase the module textbook:
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in
Politics, Palgrave, 2004.
You may also find the following books helpful (copies should be available second hand):
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press, 2001.
May, T., Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process, third edition, Open
University Press, 2002.
Other useful texts
Bell, C. and Newby, H., Doing Sociological Research, Allen and Unwin, 1977.
Bell, C. and Roberts, H., Social Researching: Politics, Problems, Practice,
Routledge Kegan Paul, 1984.
Harrison, L. Political Research, Routledge, 2001.
Marsh, D. and Stoker, S., Theory and Methods in Political Science, Macmillan,
1995.
Moon, N., Opinion Polls: History, Theory and Practice, Manchester University
Press, 1999.
9
Seminar discussion topics and reading lists
Each seminar group will draw up its own seminar programme to synchronise with the
lecture programme. Copies of the seminar programme will be distributed to each member
of the group. The order of topics will therefore differ between groups and may differ
from the order of topics listed below and on the following pages. This approach helps
to reduce pressure on library resources.
Please note that additional materials may be made available from time to time on the
module website: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/staff/grant/irm/
Term 1, Week 1: Welcome, introduction and administration, political science and
international relations in the world today
Term 1, Week 2: The discipline of politics
Seminar discussion topics
 How can an academic discipline be defined?
 What are the key characteristics of American Political Science?
 How does British Political Science compare with American?
 Does an academic discipline need a mission?
Core reading
Adcock, R. and Bevir, M., The History of Political Science’, Political Studies Review,
vol.3, no.1, January 2005.
Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R., ‘British Political Sciences’ Ch. 3. in Governance Stories,
Routledge, 2006.
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, Ch.1.
Dreijmanis, J., ‘Political Science in the United States: The Discipline and the Profession’,
Government and Opposition, vol.18, 1983, 194-217.
Gunnell, J.G., ‘Political Science on the Cusp: Recovering a Discipline’s Past’, American
Political Science Review, vol.99 (4), 2005, 597-609.
Hayward, J., Berry, B. and Brown, A. (eds.), The British Study of Politics in the Twentieth
Century, Oxford University Press, 1999, chs. 1 and 14.
Kavanagh, D., ‘British Political Science in the inter-war years: the emergence of the
founding fathers’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol.5, 4, 2003,
594-613
Kenny, M., ‘The Case for Disciplinary History: Political Studies in the 1950s and 1960s’,
British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol.6, 2004, 565-83.
10
Term 1, Week 2, continued
Kerr, P. and Kettell, S. ‘In Defence of British Politics: the Past, Present and Future of the
Discipline’, British Politics, 1, 1, 3-25
Klingemann, H-D (ed) The State of Political Science in Western Europe (electronic copy
of chapter on Britain by Goldsmith and Grant on module website)
Somit, A. and Tannenhaus, J., The Development of American Political Science: From
Burgess to Behaviouralism, Boston, Allyn and Bacon, 1967.
Waldo, D., ‘Political Science: tradition, discipline, profession, science enterprise’ in
Greenstein, F. and Polsby, N., Handbook of Political Science, vol. 7.
Further reading
Blondel, J., The Discipline of Politics, London, Butterworth, 1981.
Blondel, J., Thinking Politically, Westview Press, 1976.
Daguerre, A., ‘Murder by Numbers: The Slow Death of French Political Science’,
European Political Science (EPS), 3.3, Summer 2004.
Dearlove, J., ‘The Political Science of British Politics’, Parliamentary Affairs, 1982, 43654.
Easton, D., Gunnel, J. and Graziano, L. (eds.), The Development of Political Science: A
Comparative Survey, Routledge, 1991.
Hayward, J. and Norton, P., The Political Science of British Politics, Wheatsheaf, 1986.
Mackenzie, W.J.M., The Study of Political Science Today, Macmillan, 1971.
Marsh, D. and Stoker, G., Theory and Methods in Political Science, Macmillan, 1995.
Moran, M., ‘Interdisciplinarity and Political Science’, Politics, vol.26 (2), 2006, 73-83.
Morton, R.B., Methods and Models: a Guide to the Empirical Analysis of Formal Models
in Political Science.
Norton, R ., ‘Retrospective Reflections: An Open Letter to the APSA Leadership and
Members’, Political Science and Politics (also known as PS), No.4., December 2000, and
related articles on the “perestroika” movement in American political science, 735-41.
Stark, A., ‘Why Political Scientists Aren’t Public Intellectuals’, Political Science and
Politics (SPS), vol.xxxv, September 2002.
Symposium on ‘Shaking Thing Up? Thoughts about the Future of Political Science’,
Political Science and Politics, vol.xxxv, June 2002.
11
Term 1, Week 3: Research design: an analysis of the research process
Seminar discussion topics
 Is there an ideal model of research design?
 How valuable is the research wheel as a model of research design?
 Does research design help or hinder the process of research?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.2.
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, ch.2.
De Vaus, D., Research Design in Social Research, Sage, 2001.
Further reading
Bartov, V., ‘Research Design – A Rough Guide’, in Burnham, P. (ed.), Surviving the
Research Process in Politics, London, Pinter, 1997.
Burgess, R., Research Methods, Nelson, 1993.
Hakim, C., Research Design: Successful Designs for Social and Economic Research,
Routledge, 2000 (second edition).
Kumar, R., Research Metholology: A Step by Step Guide for Beginners, London, Sage,
1996.
Miller, D.C., Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement, London, Sage,
1970.
Punch, K., Introduction to Social Research: A Guide to Quantitative and Qualitative
Research, Sage, 1998.
Shipman, M., The Limitations of Social Research, Longman, 1991.
Shively, P., The Craft of Political Research, Prentice Hall, 1974.
12
Term 1, Week 4: Concepts and measurements in the discipline of politics
Seminar discussion topics
 What is the difference between concepts and measurements?
 Can vague concepts like power, conflict and corruption be measured in your
opinion? Or do you think it is fundamentally impossible?
 How can, for example, democracy be measured? Discuss the validity and
reliability of the scales developed by the Freedom House and the Polity IV
project.
Core reading
Adcock, R.N. and D. Collier, “Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative
and Quantitative Research” in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, no.3, 2001,
529-46.
Babbie, E., The Practice of Social Research, Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company,
2003, Chapter 5 on ‘Conceptualization, Operationalization and Measurement’
Collier, D. and Levitsky, S. ‘Democracy with adjectives’ in World Politics, 1997, 430-51.
Dahl, R.A. Polyarchy, Participation and Opposition, New Haven and London: Yale
University Press, 1971, 1-9.
Doorenspleet, R., Democratic Transitions: Exploring the Structural Sources during the
Fourth Wave, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2005, chs. 2 and 3 and Appendix 1.
Goldstein, R.J., ‘The Limitations of Using Quantitative Data in Studying Human Rights
Abuses’ in Human Rights Quarterly, vol.8, no.4, 1986, 607-627.
Zakaria, F., ‘The Rise of Illiberal Democracy’ in Foreign Affairs, vol. 76, no.6, 1997, 2243.
Freedom House, scale of freedom, see www.freedomhouse.org ;
www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=15&year=2005
Polity IV project, scale of democratization, see www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/polity/
Further reading
Bollen, K.A., ‘Issues in the Comparative Measurement of Political Democracy’ in
American Sociological Review, vol. 45, no.3, 1980, 370-390.
Bollen, K., ‘Liberal Democracy: Validity and Method Factors in Cross-National
Measures’ in American Journal of Political Science,vol.37, no.3, 1993, 1207-1230.
Collier, D. and Mahon J.E., “Conceptual ‘Stretching’ Revisited: Alternative Views of
Categories in Comparative Analysis” in American Political Science Review, vol.87, no.4,
1993, 845-55.
Collier, D., Brady, H.E. and Seawright J., ‘Conceptualization and Measurement’ in Brady,
H. and Collier, D. (eds.), Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards,
Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004, 202-9.
13
Term 1, Week 4 continued
Debate on concept formation. See APSA newsletters for qualitative methodology:
http://www.asu.edu/clas/polisci/cqrm/Newsletter.html
Diamond, L., ‘Thinking about hybrid regimes’ in Journal of Democracy, 2002, vol.13,
no.2, 21-35.
Gerring, J., Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001, chs. 3 and 4, 35-89.
Goertz, G., Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide, Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 2005.
Schedler, A., ‘What is democratic consolidation?’ in Journal of Democracy, vol.9, no.2,
1998, 91-107.
Schedler, A. ‘How should we study democratic consolidation?’ in Democratization, vol.5,
no.4, 1998, 1-19
Vanhanen, T., Prospects of Democracy, a Study of 172 Countries, London: Routledge,
1997.
14
Term 1, Week 5: Quantitative analyses in the discipline of politics
Seminar discussion topics

What is the difference between descriptive and inferential statistics?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of quantitative studies in the
discipline of politics in your opinion? Use the articles below to answer this
question.
Core reading
Babbie, E., The Practice of Social Research, Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company,
2003, ch.15, ‘Elementary Quantitative Analyses’
Babbie, E., The Practice of Social Research, Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company,
2003, ch.17, ‘Social Statistics’
Bollen, K.A., ‘World System Position, Dependency, and Democracy: The Cross-National
Evidence’, American Sociological Review, vol. 48, 1983, 468-79.
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.5.
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.6.
Inglehart, R. and C. Welzel, Modernization, Cultural Change and Democracy; The
Human Development Sequence, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005, ch.8, ‘The
Causal Link between Democratic Values and Democratic Institutions’.
Lipset, S.M., ‘Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political
Legitimacy’ in American Political Science Review, 1959, vol. 53, 69-105.
Przeworski, A. and Limongi, F., ‘Modernization: Theories and Facts’ in World Politics,
1997, vol.49, no.2, 155-183.
Further reading
Blais, A. and Carty, R.K., ‘Does Proportional Representation Foster Voter Turnout?’ in
European Journal of Political Research, vol.18, 1996, 167-81.
Boix, C. and S. Stokes, S., ‘Endogenous democratization’ in World Politics, vol.55, 2003,
517-49.
Foweraker J. and Landman, T., ‘Economic development and democracy revisited: why
dependency theory is not yet dead’ in Democratization, vol.11, no.1, 2004, 1-20.
Haggard, S. and Kaufman, R., ‘The political economy of democratic transitions’,
Comparative Politics, vol.29, no.3, 1996, 263-83.
Term 1, Week 5 continued.…
15
Hegre, H., Ellingsen, T., Gates, S. and Gleditsch, N.P., ‘Toward a Democratic Civil
Peace? Democracy, Political Change, and Civil War, 1816-1992’ in American Political
Science Review, vol.95, 2001, 33-48.
Lipset, S., ‘The social requisites of democracy revisited’, American Sociological Review,
vol.59, 1994, 1-22.
Moore, M., ‘Democracy and development in cross-national perspective: a new look at the
statistics’, Democratization, vol.2, no.2, 1995, 1-19.
Saideman, S., Lanoue, D., Campenni, M. and Stanton, S., ‘Democratization, Political
Institutions, and Ethnic Conflict: A Pooled, Cross-Sectional Time Series Analysis from
1985-1998’, Comparative Political Studies, vol.35, no.1, 2002, 103-129.
Term 1, Week 6: Reading week
16
Term 1, Week 7: Models of voting behaviour
Seminar discussion topics:
 Distinguish between sociological and psychological models of voting behaviour.
What are their advantages and limitations?
 What are the main features of economic and rational choice models? How realistic are
they?
 How do models help in the analysis of voting behaviour?
Core reading
Denver, D., Elections and Voters in Britain, pp. 18-25,Chs. 3 and 4, Palgrave Macmillan,
2003
Evans J., Voters and Voting: an Introduction, Sage, 2004.
Heath, A., Jowell, R. and Curtice, J., Understanding Political Change: The British Voter
1954-87, Pergamon, 1993.
Sanders, D., ‘The Economy and Voting’, Parliamentary Affairs, 54, 2001., 789-802
Sanders, D., ‘Conservative Incompetence, Labour Responsibility and the Feelgood Factor:
why the economy failed to save the Conservatives in 1997’, Electoral Studies, 1999, 18, 2,
251-70
Further reading
Berelson, B. and Mcphee, W., A study of opinion formation in a presidential election,
Chicago University Press, 1954.
Butler, D and Stokes, D., Political Change in Britain, Macmillan 1971
Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W. and Stokes, D., The American Voter, John Wiley,
1960.
Lewis-Beck, M. and Paldam, M. ‘Economic Voting: an Introduction’, Electoral Studies,
2000
Nice, N., Verba, S. and Petrocik, J., The Changing American Voter, Harvard University
Press, 1976.
17
Term 1, Week 8: The role of theory in the research process
Seminar discussion topics
 How can ‘social theory’ be defined?
 Is research practice inevitably deductive or inductive?
 How important is social theory in the research process?
 What are the aims of critical theory? Is it scientific?
Core reading
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, ch.1.
May, T., Social Research: Issues, Methods and Processes, ch.2.
Marsh, D. and Stoker, G., Theory and Methods in Political Science, Macmillan, 1995.
Further reading
Beecher, J. and Andres, D., ‘Applied Political Science: Bridging the Gap or a Bridge Too
Far?’, Political Science and Politics, vol.32, September 1989.
Bhaskar, R., A Realistic Theory of Science, Harvester, 1978.
Burgess, R., Research Methods, Nelson, 1993.
Bulmer, M., Sociological Research Methods, Macmillan, 1993.
Hendrick, Clyde and Jones, The Nature of Theory and Research in Social Psychology,
1972.
May, T., Situating Social Theory, Open University Press, 1996.
Miller, D.C., Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement, 5th edition, Sage,
1991.
Mozelis, J., Sociological Theory: What Went Wrong? 1995.
Mullen, B., Sociologists on Sociology.
Sanders, W.B. and Pinkey, K.T., The Conduct of Social Research.
18
Hegre, H., Ellingsen, T., Gates, S. and Gleditsch, N.P., ‘Toward a Democratic Civil
Peace? Democracy, Political Change, and Civil War, 1816-1992’ in American Political
Science Review, vol.95, 2001, 33-48.
Lipset, S., ‘The social requisites of democracy revisited’, American Sociological Review,
vol.59, 1994, 1-22.
Moore, M., ‘Democracy and development in cross-national perspective: a new look at the
statistics’, Democratization, vol.2, no.2, 1995, 1-19.
Saideman, S., Lanoue, D., Campenni, M. and Stanton, S., ‘Democratization, Political
Institutions, and Ethnic Conflict: A Pooled, Cross-Sectional Time Series Analysis from
1985-1998’, Comparative Political Studies, vol.35, no.1, 2002, 103-129.
19
Term 1, Week 9: The 2005 General Election and the Downs Model of Voting
Seminar discussion topics
 Why did the Labour Party win the General Election of 2005?
 Why did the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats fail to achieve a
breakthrough at the 2005 General Election?
 Is the electorate alienated from the electoral process?
 How useful are models of voting behaviour in explaining the 2005 General
Election result?
Core reading on the 2005 General Election
Norris, P., and Wlezien, C., Britain Votes 2005, Oxford University Press, 2005.
Worcester, R.M and Mortimore, R., Explaining Labour’s Landslip, Politicos, 2006.
Butler, D. and Kavanagh, D., The British General Election of 2005, Macmillan, 2006.
Cole, M., Jones, J., Rallings, C. and Thrasher, M., ‘Elections and Public Opinion: Blair’s
Third and Final Electoral Triumph’ in Rush, M. and Giddings, P. (eds.), The Palgrave
Review of British Politics, 2005, 30-45.
Downs, A. An Economic Theory of Democracy, Harper Row, 1957
Geddes, A. and Tonge, J. (eds.), The UK General Election 2005, Palgrave/Macmillan,
2006.
Hindmoor, A., New Labour at the Centre: Constructing Political Space, Oxford
University Press, 2004.
Hindmoor, A., ‘Reading Downs: New Labour and and Economic Theory of Democracy’,
British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol.7, no.3, 2005, 442-59.
Parsons, S., ‘The Rationality of Voting: A Reponse to Dowding’, British Journal of
Politics and International Relations, vol.8, no.2, 2005, 295-8, and Dowding’s response
299-302.
Robertson, D., A Theory of Party Competition, Wiley, 1972, Ch.2
www.mori.com/election2005/index.shtml
Core reading on the 2001 General Election
Butler, D. and Kavanagh, D., The British General Election of 2001, Macmillan, 2002.
Grant, W., Economic Policy in Britain, Palgrave, 2002, ch.7.
Putnam, R.D., Bowling Alone, especially ch. 2 and Section III.
Worcester, R.M and Mortimore, R., Explaining Labour’s Second Landslide, Politicos,
2002.
20
Term 1, Week 10: Researching turnout in recent British general elections
Seminar discussion topics
 Why did turnout fall so dramatically in the 2001 General Election?
 Why did turnout rise only slightly in the General Election of 2005?
 Are young voters alienated from the political system?
 How can participation in elections be improved?
Core reading
Downs, A., An Economic Theory of Democracy, Harper Row, 1957.
Geys, B., ‘ “Rational” Theories of Voter Turnout: A Review’, Political Studies Review,
vol.4, no.1, 2006, 16-35.
Pattie, C. and Johnston, R., ‘A Low Turnout Landslide: Abstention at the British General
Election of 1997’, Political Studies, 2001, vol.49, 286-305.
Denver, D., Elections and Voting Behaviour in Britain, Harvester, Wheatsheaf, 1994,
ch.2, ‘Turnout: Why People Vote (or Don’t).
Worcester, R. and Mortimore, R., Explaining Labour’s Second Landslide, Politicos, 2002,
ch.2.
Worcester, R., Mortimore, R. and Baines, P., Explaining Labour’s Landslip, Politico’s,
2005, Ch.5
Franklin, M.N., Voter Turnout and the Dynamics of Electoral Competition in Advanced
Democracies since 1945, Cambridge University Press.
Blais, A. and Dobrzynska, A., ‘Turnout in electoral democracies’, European Journal of
Political Research 33 (1998), 239-61.
Henn, M., Weinstein, M. and Wring, D., ‘A Generation Apart? Youth and Political
Participation in Britain, British Journal of Politics and International Studies, vol.4, 2, June
2002, 167.
Henn, M., Weinstein, M. and Forrest, S., ‘Uninterested Youth? Young People’s Attitudes
towards Party Politics in Britain’, Political Studies, , vol.53, no.3, 2005, 556-78.
Further reading
Lewis-Beek, M. and Paldam, M.,’Economic Voting: An Introduction’, Electoral Studies,
2000.
Brockington, D., ‘The Paradox of Proportional Representation: The Effect of Party
Systems and Coalitions on Individuals’ Electoral Participation’, Political Studies, 52
(2004) 469-90.
Denver, D. and Hands, G., ‘Exploring Variations in Turnout: Constituencies and Wards in
the Scottish Parliament Elections of 1999 and 2002’, British Journal of Politics and
International Relations, 6 (2004), 527-42.
Denver, D. and Hands, G., ‘Marginality and Turnout in British General Elections’, British
Journal of Political Science, 4 (1974), 17-35.
Denver, D. and Hands, G., ‘Marginality and Turnout in British General Elections in the
1970s’, British Journal of Political Science, 15 (1985), 381-88.
21
Denver, D. and Hands, G., ‘Turnout’ in Norris, P. and Gavin, N. (eds.), Britain Votes
1997, Oxford University Press, 1997.
Hill, L, ‘On the Reasonableness of Compelling Citizens to Vote: the Australian Case’,
Political Studies, 50 (2003), 80-101.
Website of the Electoral Commission: http://www.electoralcommission.gov.uk
22
Term 2, Week 1: Social surveys in political research
Seminar discussion topics
 How useful are surveys in political research?
 What are the advantages and limitations of survey research?
 Distinguish between a) random sampling, b) systematic random sampling,
c) multi-stage sampling, d) cluster sampling, e) quota sampling and f) snowball
sampling.
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, chs. 4,5,6.
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press, 2001, ch.4.
Harrison, L., Political Research: An Introduction, Routledge, 2001, ch.3.
Moon, N., Opinion Polls: History, Theory and Practice, Manchester University Press,
1999.
Further reading
Fink, A. and Kosecoff, J., How to Conduct Surveys (second edition), London, Sage, 1998.
Hodder-Williams, R. Public Opinion Polls and British Politics, Routledge & Kegan Paul,
1970.
Hoinville, G., Jowell, R. et al, Survey Research Practice, Heinemann, 1978.
Marsh, C., The Survey Method: The Contribution of Surveys to Sociological Explanation,
London, Allen & Unwin, 1982.
Teer, F. and Spence, J.D., Political Opinion Polls, Hutchinson, 1973.
Worcester, R.M., British Public Opinion: A Guide to the History and Methodology of
Public Opinion Polling.
Worcester, R.M. and Mortimore, R., Explaining Labour’s Landslide, ch.2.
Classical examples of Political Surveys:
Butler, D. and Stokes, D., Political Change in Britain, Macmillan, 1971.
Crewe, I., ‘Do Butler and Stokes Really Explain Political Change in Britain?’, European
Journal of Political Research, 1974, 47-02.
Crewe, I. et al., ‘Partisan Dealignment in Britain 19674’, British Journal of Political
Science, 1977, 129-90.
Term 2, Week 1 continued.…
23
Heath, A., Jowell, R. and Curtice, J., The Rise of New Labour, Oxford University Press,
2001.
Rose, R., Governing without Consensus, Faber, 1971.
Saggar, S., Race and Representation, Manchester University Press, 2000.
Seyd, P., and Whiteley, P., New Labour’s Grass Roots, Clarendon Press, 1999.
Whiteley, P., Seyd, P. and Richardson, J., True Blues: The Politics of Conservative Party
Membership, Clarendon Press, 1994.
24
Term 2, Week 2: Participant observation
Seminar discussion topics
 How can participant observation be defined?
 What are the advantages and disadvantages of participant observation?
 How important are gatekeepers in participant observation research?
 What ethical issues may arise in participant observation?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.10.
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, chs.8, 14.
May, T., Social Research, ch.7.
Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R., Governance Stories, London, Routledge, 2006, Ch.7,
‘Everyday Life in a Ministry’.
Further reading
Becker, H., ‘Problems of Inference and Proof in Participant Observation, American
Sociological Review, vol.23, 1958, 652-660.
Bell, C. and Newby, H., Doing Sociological Research, especially chs. by Newby, Bell,
Pahl and Wallis.
Boelen, W.A.M., ‘Street Corner Society, Cornerville Revisited’, Journal of
Contemporary Ethnography, vol.21, no.1, April 1992, 11-51.
Bulmer, M. (ed.), Social Research Ethics, Macmillan, 1982, chs. 5 and 12.
Burton, F., The Politics of Legitimacy: Struggles in a Belfast Community, Routledge
Kegan Paul, 1978.
Gans, H.J., The Levittowners: Ways of Life and Politics in a New Suburban Community,
Allen Lane, 1967.
Giulianotti, R., ‘Participant Observation and Research into Football Hooliganism:
Reflections on Problems of Entry and Everyday Risks’, Sociology of Sport Journal,
vol.12, 1995, 1-20.
Humphreys, H., The Tea Room Trade, Duckworth, 1970.
Okeley, J., The Traveller Gypsies, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Pryce, K., Endless Pressure, London, Penguin, 1979.
Purdie, B., Politics in the Streets, Blackshott Press, 1990.
Taylor, A., Women Drug Users: An Ethnography of a Female Injecting Community,
Clarendon Press, 1993.
Whyte, W. F., Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of and Italian Slum, fourth
edition, University of Chicago Press, 1993.
25
Term 2, Week 3: Ethical issues in social research
Seminar discussion topics
 In what areas may ethical issues arise in social research?
 How important is informed consent?
 Can covert research ever be justified?
 Under what circumstance, if any, does a researcher have an ethical duty to
reveal the identity of a source and information gained in confidence?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.11.
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, ch.24.
Carroll, J.D., ‘Confidentiality of Social Science Research Sources and Data: The Popkin
Case’, Political Science, Washington, 1973.
Finch, J., ‘Ethics and Politics of Interviewing Women’ in Bell, C. and Roberts, H., Social
Researching: Politics, Problems, Practice, Routledge Kegan Paul, 1984.
Horowitz, I. (ed.), The Rise and Fall of Project Camelot, Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T. Press,
1967.
May, T., Social Research, ch.3.
Further reading
American Political Science Association: Code of Ethics.
Barnes, J.A., Who Should Know What?, Cambridge University Press, 1980.
Barnes, J.A., The Ethics of Inquiry in Social Science, Oxford University Press, 1977.
Bulmer, M. (ed.), Censuses, Surveys and Privacy, Macmillan, 1979.
Bulmer, M., Social Research Ethics, Macmillan, 1982.
Bell, C. and Newby, H., Doing Sociological Research, especially Introduction and chs.4
and 7.
British Sociological Association: Statement of Ethical Practice.
Humphreys, L., The Tea Room Trade, Duckworth, 1970.
Political Studies Association, Code of Practice.
26
Term 2, Week 4: Elite interviewing
Seminar discussion topics
 How does elite interviewing differ from other types of interviewing procedure?
 Is access the most difficult problem in elite interviewing?
 How trustworthy is data gained by elite interviewing?
 What ethical issues arise in elite interviewing?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.9.
Further reading
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, ch.15.
Davies, P.H.J., ‘Spies as informants: triangulation and the interpretation of elite interview
data in the study of the intelligence and security services’, Politics, vol.21, 1, 2001, 74.
Dexter, L.A., Elite and Specialised Interviewing, Sage, Evanston, 1970. (New edition,
ECPR Press, 2006)
Ethridge, M. The Political Research Experience: Readings and Analysis. (1990) Chapter
9 on elite interviewing.
Goldstein, K., ‘Getting in the door: sampling and completing elite interviews’, Political
Science and Politics, vol.24, 2002, 683.
Grant, W., ‘Elite Interviewing: A Practical Guide’, University of Birmingham Discussion
Papers in German Studies, IGS2000/11.
Headey, B., British Cabinet Ministers, Allen & Unwin, 1974.
Hertz, R. and Imber, J.B. (eds.), Studying Elites Using Qualitative Methods, London,
Sage, 1995.
Lilleker, G., ‘Interviewing the political elite: navigating a potential minefield’, Politics,
vol.23, 3, 2003.
May, T., Social Research, ch.6.
Moyser, G. and Wagstaffe, M. Research Methods in Elite Studies
Richards, D., ‘Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls’, Politics, vol.16, 1996, 199204.
Rubin, H. J. and Rubin, I. S., Qualitative Interviewing:The Art of Hearing Data, Sage,
1995.
Seldon, A., Contemporary History, Oxford, Blackwell, 1988.
Steward, G., ‘On the Record: An Introduction to Interviewing’, ch.7 in Burnham, P.,
Surviving the Research Process in Politics, London, Pinter, 1997.
27
Term 2, Week 4, continued
van Schendelen, ‘Interviewing Members of Parliament’, Political Methodology, vol.10, 3,
1984, 314.
Williams, P., ‘Interviewing Politicians: The Life of Hugh Gaitskell’, Political Quarterly,
vol.51, 1980, 303-16.
28
Term 2, Week 5: Focus groups
Seminar discussion topics
•
Why are focus groups so popular as a means of obtaining information on policy?
•
When should focus groups be used?
•
What problems arise in the use of focus groups as a research method?
•
Why are focus groups often considered a feminist method of research?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, 105-13.
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, ch.16.
Conover, P., Crewe, I. and Searing D., ‘The Nature of Citizenship in the United States and
Great Britain: Empirical Comments on Theoretical Themes’, Journal of Politics, vol.53,
no.3, 1991.
Gould, P., The Unfinished Revolution, Little Brown, 1998.
Further reading
Barbour, R. and Kitzinger, J., Developing Focus Group Research, London, Sage, 1999.
Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., and Robson, K., Focus Groups in Social
Research, London, Sage, 2001.
Burton, D., Research Training for Social Scientists, London, Sage, 2000, ch.14.
Greenbaum, T., Moderating Focus Groups, London, Sage, 2000.
Greenbaum, T.L., The Handbook for Focus Group Research, London, Sage, 1998.
http://www.pollingreport.com/focus.htm
Krueger, R.A. and Casey, M.A., Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research,
Sage, 2000.
Madiz, M. ‘Focus Groups in Feminist Research’ in Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.),
Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, 2000.
Morgan, D.C., ‘Focus Groups’, American Sociological Review, 129-52, 1996.
Wilkinson, S., ‘Focus Groups: A Feminist Method’, Psychology of Women Quarterly,
vol.23, 1999, 225-30.
Term 2, Week 6: Reading week
29
Term 2, Week 7: Documentary analysis
Seminar discussion topics
•
How can documents be classified?
•
How valuable are documentary archives for political research?
•
How useful is content analysis as a method of documentary research?
•
How valuable are the diaries and memoirs of politicians for political scientists?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004, ch.7.
Catterall, P. and Jones, H., Understanding Documents and Sources.
Bryman, A., Social Research Methods, ch.18.
Glynn, S. and Booth, A., ‘The Public Record Office and Recent British Economic
Histiography’ The Economic History Review, vol.32, no.3.
Webb, E. J. et al., ‘The use of archival sources in Social Research’ in Bulmer, M. (ed.),
Sociological Research Methods.
May, T., Social Research, ch.8.
Scott, J., A Matter of Record, Cambridge, Polity, 1990.
Laver, M., Benoit, K. and Garry, J., ‘Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts
using Words as Data’, American Political Science Review, 2003.
Further reading
Castle, B., The Castle Diaries 1974-76, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1980.
Clark, A., Diaries, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1993.
Crossman, R., Diaries of a Cabinet Minister, Hamish Hamilton & Jonathan Cape, 1975.
Duverger, M., Introduction to the Social Sciences, part I, ch.1
Gamble, A., ‘Political Memoirs’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations,
vol.4., no.1, April 2002.
Heath, E., The Course of My Life: The Autobiography of Edward Heath, Hodder &
Stoughton, 1998.
Jones, G.W ., ‘The Value of Recent Biographies, Autobiographies and Diaries’,
Parliamentary Affairs, vol.34, 1981, 335-46.
Kelly, S., ‘Ministers Matter: Gaitskell and Butler at Odds over Convertibility’,
Contemporary British History, vol.14, no.4, 27-53.
Lamont, N., In Office, London, Little Brown, 1999.
Madge, J., The Tools of Social Science, ch.2.
Major, J. The Autobiography, London, Harper Collins, 1999.
Morgan, J., ‘A Review of Reviews of Crossman’, Political Quarterly 8 (1977), 214-20.
Thatcher, M., The Downing Street Years, London, Harper Collins, 1993.
Williams, P., ‘Foot Faults in the Gaitskell-Bevan Match’, Political Studies, 1979, 129-40.
Wilson, H., The Labour Government 1964-70, Pelican Books, 1974.
30
Term 2, Week 8: Using the internet for research
Seminar discussion topics
What are the advantages and limitations of the internet as a research source in
political science?
Does the internet have to be treated differently from other information sources?
Which search engines and/or subject directories are most useful for political research?
Core reading
Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z., Research Methods in Politics,
Palgrave, 2004.
Buckler, S. and Dolowitz, D., Politics on the Internet, Routledge 2005
Journal search engines or subject directories:
Web of knowledge
http://wok.mimas.ac.uk
JSTOR
http://uk.jstor.org/search
Political Studies Association
gateway:
http://www.psa.ac.uk
Subject directories:
Norbert’s Politics
http://betterworldlinks.org/politik.htm
Zarate’s Political Collection
http://www.terra.es/personal2/monolith
Google News
Lexis-Nexis
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/exchange-international
Alltheweb
http://www.althewebcom?cat=news
Online primary data:
US Census Bureau
http://www.census.gov
Central Intelligence Agency
(to be added)
OECD
http://www.abd.org
Asian Development Bank
UK Office of National Statistics
http://www.statistics.gov.uk
UK National Archives
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Country profiles:
Foreign and Commonwealth
Office
http://www.fco.gov.uk
Central Intelligence Agency
http://www.cia.gov/
European Union news and
links
http://www.euractiv.com
31
Term 2, Weeks 9-10, Term 3, Week 1: Researching pressure groups
Seminar discussion topics
•
How can pressure groups be classified?
•
How can pressure group effectiveness be measured?
•
How valuable is the distinction between insider groups and outsider groups?
•
Under what conditions does direct action work as a pressure group strategy?
Core reading
Binderkrantz, A., ‘Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and
Strategies of Pressure’, Political Studies, vol.53, no.4, 694-715.
Grant, W., Pressure Groups and British Politics, Macmillan, 2000, especially ch.10.
Grant, W., ‘Pressure Politics: A Politics of Collective Consumption, Parliamentary
Affairs, 58, 2, 2005, 366-79.
Grant, W. and Greaves, J., ‘Pressure Politics: Business as Usual but an Expanding Private
Sector’ in Rush, M. and Giddings, P. (eds.), The Palgrave Review of British Politics,
2005, 61-77.
Further reading
Baggott, R. Allsop, J. and Jones, K. Speaking for Patients and Carers, Palgrave, 2005.
Doherty, B., ‘Paving the Way: the Rise of Direct Action Against Road-Building’, Political
Studies, vol.47, 2, 1999, 275-91.
Doherty, B. et al., ‘Explaining the Fuel Protests’, The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations, 5, 1. 2003.
Dudley, G. and Richardson, J., ‘Arenas Without Rules and the Policy Change Process:
Outsider Groups and British Road Policy’, Political Studies, vol.46, 4, 1988, 727-47.
Edwards, M. and Fowler, A. (eds), The Earthscan Reader on NGO Management, London,
Earthscan, 2002.
Environmental Politics 1999, special issue on environmental movements: local, national
and global.
Grant, W., Pressure Groups, Politics and Democracy in Britain, Harvester Wheatsheaf,
1995.
Grant, W., ‘Pressure Politics: From “Insider” Politics to Direct Action’, Parliamentary
Affairs, vol.54, no.2, April 2001.
Grant, W., ‘Pressure Politics: the Challenges for Democracy’, Parliamentary Affairs,
vol.56, no.2., April 2003.
Grant, W., ‘Pressure Politics: the Changing World of Pressure Groups’, Parliamentary
Affairs, vol.57, no.2, April 2004.
Term 2, Weeks 9-10 and Term 3, Week 1 continued.…
32
Grant, W. and Greaves, J. ‘Pressure Politics: Business as Usual but an Expanding Private
Sector’ in Giddings, P. and Rush, M. (eds) The Palgrave Review of British Politics 2005,
61-76, Palgrave-Macmillan, 2006.
Jordan, G. and Maloney, W., The Protest Business, Manchester University Press 1997.
Kent, A., ‘The transformation of gay and lesbian politics in Britain’, British Journal of
Politics and International Relations, vol.5, no.1, February 2003.
Page, E.C., ‘The Insider/Outsider Distinction: An Empirical Investigation’, British
Journal of Politics and International Relations, June 1999.
Rawcliffe, P., Environmental Pressure Groups in Transition, Manchester University
Press, 1998/
Richardson J.J. and Jordan, A.G. Governing Under Pressure, Martin Robertson, 1979.
Seel, B., Paterson, M. and Doherty, B. (eds.), Direct Action in British Environmentalism
http://www.futurefoundation.net.
Smith, M.J., Pressure, Power and Policy, Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993.
Stoker, G., Why Politics Matters: Making Democracy Work, Palgrave-Macmillan, esp.
Chs. 5 and 9
Whiteley, P. and Winyard, S.J., Pressure for the Poor, Methuen, 1987.
33