Upload
aleesha-chase
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
P OSITIVISM : T HE S CIENTIFIC A PPROACH Positivism: Scientific methodology to find patterns in human and state behaviour Popular rise since post-WWII Process of gathering statistical data, identifying patterns/generalizations and testing against hypotheses to formulate theory Contributed to models of Rational Choice Theory, Game theories Application of natural sciences to social sciences, including Area Studies But can the social world really be quantified?
Citation preview
COMPARATIVE METHOD: THE MIDDLE GROUND APPROACHPresentation by Vee Chansa-Ngavej
CASE STUDY APPROACH Case Study: Method for early studies of areas
Lack of information led to various case studies Orientalism scholarship as “cases” Latin America (Merle King article), Africa, Asia Study of individual countries, no comparisons
No systematic method! Cases were isolated Data was qualitative, (descriptive, subjective, humanistic)
POSITIVISM: THE SCIENTIFIC APPROACH Positivism: Scientific methodology to find patterns
in human and state behaviour Popular rise since post-WWII Process of gathering statistical data, identifying
patterns/generalizations and testing against hypotheses to formulate theory
Contributed to models of Rational Choice Theory, Game theories
Application of natural sciences to social sciences, including Area Studies
But can the social world really be quantified?
DIFFERENCES IN APPROACH Quantitative or Qualitative approach?
Quantitative (Positivism) Qualitative (Case Studies)
Statistical/Numerical/Measurable Narrative/Historical/Interpretive
Many Cases (>20) Case Study / Comparative
Deductive Inference (Theory Testing)
Top-down
Rational/Scientific/Empirical
Inductive (Theory Generation)
Bottom-up
Normative/Humanistic/Subjective
“Who, What, When, Where”? “Why, How”?
PROS AND CONS Quantitative approach:
Pros: Can use statistical analysis to identify patterns and establish generalizations to test hypotheses
Cons: Lacks explanatory depth…does not tell the “story” behind the numbers
Qualitative approach: Pros: Can provide important details and insights into
different phenomena Cons: Not suitable for testing hypotheses,
establishing patterns/generalizations and theory-building
EXAMPLE OF QUANTITATIVE METHOD
EXAMPLE
EXAMPLE OF QUALITATIVE METHOD
ENTER THE COMPARATIVE METHOD (SMALL N) Quantitative / Qualitative trade off between
hypothesis testing (predictive power) and explanatory powers
Comparative Method as the “Middle Ground” approach
Provides insightful analysis into a few cases, ability to compare and contrast, singling out causal variables
May start out as deductive hypothesis testing, but could also lead to inductive discovery of new hypotheses
Can provide foundation for theory-building More comparisons could eventually lead to statistical
model! Enjoyed rise in the 60s and 70s Ideal approach when confronted with lack of
resources (time, energy, funding!)
COMPARATIVE METHOD (CONT.) Ideal methodology for political science and IR due
to nature of social phenomena There exists relatively few cases of wars, famines, etc. Unlike natural sciences, social phenomena such as
World Wars and Revolutions cannot simply be replicated in their exact historical contexts in any laboratory)
Rise of comparative historical analysis methodology Need for identifying causal variables among the
few available cases (risk of confusing cause vs. correlation)
However, because few cases are compared, it is difficult to make generalizations and formulate theory
REFINEMENTS TO COMPARATIVE METHOD Lijphart’s suggestions on dealing with few cases:
Limit cases to “comparable” ones Identify cases that have common peripheral variables
(variables that are not central to the study, thereby in effect “controlling” those variables)
Identify cases that are different in terms of key variables to enhance analysis of the influence of causal variables
End goal: Developing theory that is parsimonious Focuses on a smaller number of explanatory factors Reduction of variables leading to (over)simplification
(i.e. Assumptions made in Rational Choice Theory) Leads to causal analysis, hypothesis testing, eventually to a
theory with (hopefully) predictive powers!
“SCIENCE” IN SOCIAL SCIENCE
Can the social world be quantified? Natural science theories: Tend to be deterministic Social science theories: Tend to be probabilistic
Possibility of oversimplification of social phenomenas Why can’t IR scholars and economists predict important events? End of Cold War, Arab Spring, recessions, the list goes on…! No agreement among scholars of different schools of thought!!
Levels of Analysis: 2nd and 3rd Levels of Analysis: May be easier to seek
patterns and make generalizations (trade patterns, outbreaks of war, revolutions, election poll/results, famines/victims)
1st Level: Difficult to quantify human pschye in each social context/historical situation (minds of leaders/ decision-makers)