Qualitative Methods

Syllabus for Qaulitative Research Methods at JHU, 2017 

Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Social Science

Course Goal

The central goal of the class is to enable students to understand and critique methodologically qualitative research designs in the social sciences. This course will explore the techniques, uses, strengths, and limitations qualitative methods, while emphasizing the relationships among these methods, alternative methods, and contemporary debates in the social science. The research examples used to illustrate methodological issues will be drawn from international relations, comparative politics, and Asian politics. However, the methodological content of the course is also applicable to the study of history, sociology, and economics.

    The course will begin with a focus on the nature of social science, theory development, hypothesis testing, research design, and causal inference. With this epistemological grounding, this course then examines specific techniques, including field work and interviews. It will then explore the core issues in qualitative research design, including methods of historical comparative analysis, case studies, process tracing, content analysis, and discourse analysis. It concludes with student presentations of case study research designs and constructive critiques of these designs by all participants

Requirement

Participation in Discussion Questions

Each student will prepare one short presentation (at least 5-no more 10 minutes) in analyzing or assessing some aspect or aspects of the required readings for one of the class meetings during the course, and will initiate discussion on those readings during the class. Specifically, the content of the oral presentation can range from summarizing a method(s) or critiquing an article(s) of this week’s reading. Student presentations begin at the second session of this class and a sign-up sheet is available in the first meeting.

4 Short Exercises

There are 4 assignments throughout this semester, and they are due at the same date of these classes (see below for the specific sessions). The length of the papers should be around 2-3 pages and no more than 2000 words.

Research Design Paper and Final Presentation

Students will be required to submit copies of a research design paper to all participants one week (week 13) in advance of presenting their design. Aside from class participation and oral presentation, each student will present their design in the final session of this class with a 3-minute introduction and summation. The rest of the time (3-5 minutes) will focus on constructive critiques from the students and instructor.

Research designs should address all of the following tasks: 1) specification of the research problem and research objectives, in relation to the current stage of development and research needs of the relevant research program, related literatures, and alternative explanations; 2) specification of the independent and dependent variables of the main hypothesis of interest and alternative hypotheses; 3) selection of a historical case or cases that are appropriate in light of the first two tasks, and justification of why these cases were selected and others were not; 4) specification of the data requirements, including both process tracing data and measurements of the independent and dependent variables for the main hypotheses of interest, including alternative explanations

        The ideal length of this paper would be around 7-10 pages (double spaced, no more than 5000 words), and it is due at the end of class (week 14).

Grading

The format is a combination of class discussion, student presentations, and lectures. Constructive and thoughtful class participation is important in this course and will be taken into account when calculating the final grade.

Short Exercises: 35 %

Research Design Paper: 35%

Class Participation: 15 %

Final Presentation and Leading Discussion: 15%

Assignments

Exercise 1: Concept and Measurement

1.  Select a concept of research interest to you (democracy, power politics, terrorism, etc.) Discuss the concept and its measurement in that line of research with reference to specific and published work.

2.  Identify a research question(s) based on the concept noted from above. In your own words, what are ways of making it more likely that your research will come up with new ideas, concepts, and variables?

Exercise 2: Research Design

Build a research design based on your topic of interest. Be specific about framing the puzzle, structuring arguments, and data collection. 

Exercise 3: Interviews and Fieldwork

1.  How can you avoid confirmation bias and hindsight bias in your field research?

2.  How can you best prepare for key interviews? In what order should you do interviews, and what might be the effects of early interviews on later ones? In terms of arranging questions and schedule, how much effort should you devote to interviewing top officials versus lower-level bureaucrats or officials?

Exercise 4: Case Studies

1.  What are the inherent limitations of case study methods? When pitting against statistical analysis and formal modeling, what are the comparative advantages of this approach?

2.  Think through the research interests with which you are most familiar (democracy, terrorism, military conflicts, etc.) and assess whether case studies have contributed to progressive theoretical development and empirical understanding.

Textbooks available at the Bookstore and Library (Online)  

·  Bennett, Andrew and Jeffrey T. Checkel, eds. Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

·  Brady, Henry E. and David Collier. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. 2nd edition. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield, 2010.

·  Geddes, Barbara. Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003.

·  George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

·  Kapiszewski, Diana, Lauren M. MacLean, and Benjamin L. Read. Field research in political science: practices and principles. Cambridge University Press, 2015.

·  King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.

·  Mahoney, James, and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Eds. Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Part I: Introduction

1.     What is Social Science?

    Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. "Must international studies be a

science?" Millennium 43.3 (2015): 942-965.

King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. "Chapter 1: The Science in

Social Science." Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994: 3-33.

2.     Choosing Questions and Hypothesis Testing

Hall, Peter A. "Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Politics." In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, edited by James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003: 373-404.

Rogowski, Ronald. "How Inference in Social (but not the Physical) Sciences

Neglects Theoretical Anomaly." in Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, edited by Henry E. Brady and David Collier. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

   Geddes, Barbara. "Big Questions, Little Answers: How the Questions You Choose

Affect the Answer You Get." Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003.

3.     Concepts and Measurement in Qualitative Studies (exercise1.)

King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. "Chapter 2: Descriptive

Inference." Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994

   Collier, David, and Steven Levitsky. "Democracy with adjectives: Conceptual

innovation in comparative research." World politics 49.03 (1997): 430-451.

Barnett, Michael N. and Raymond Duvall. "Power in International Politics."

International Organization vol.59 no.1 (Winter 2005): 39-75.

4.     Causal Inference

Collier, David, Henry E. Brady, and Jason Seawright. "Sources of Leverage in

Causal Inference: Toward an Alternative View of Methodology."

Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield, 2004

George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. “Chapter 7: Case Study and the

Philosophy of Science” in Case Studies and Theory Development in the

Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. "Causality and Causal

Inference" In Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative                      Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.

5.     Research Design (exercise 2.)

George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. “Chapter 4: Designing Case Study

Research” in Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

Geddes, Barbara. "Research Design and the Accumulation of Knowledge." In

Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003.

David Collier, James Mahoney, and Jason Seawright. “Claiming Too Much:

Warning about Selection Bias” in Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools,Shared Standards, edited by Henry E. Brady and David Collier. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

Part II: Qualitative Data Analysis

6.     Overview: Tools for Qualitative Research

George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. “Chapter 11: Integrating Comparative

and Within-Case Analysis: Typological Theory.” in Case Studies and

Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

Munck, Gerardo L. "Tools for Qualitative Research." In Rethinking Social

Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, edited by Henry E. Brady and David Collier. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

Kapiszewski, Diana, Lauren M. MacLean, and Benjamin L. Read. “Chapter 3:

Preparing for fieldwork,” in Field research in political science: practices and principles. Cambridge University Press, 2015.

*Students must also read the “Navigating the Homewood Institutional Review Board (HIRB)” available at the school’s website. Each student may use their spare time throughout this semester and complete the IRB training module online (read the instructions, and then visit https://www.citiprogram.org/Default.asp). Submission of a copy of conformation is required before the end of course. For more information about application forms, templates, and IRB training see http://web.jhu.edu/Homewood-IRB

7.     Field Work: Principles and Practices

Kapiszewski, Diana, Lauren M. MacLean, and Benjamin L. Read. “Chapter1:

Field research in political science: practices and principles,” “Chapter 5: Thinking outside the (archive) box: discovering data in the field,” in Field research in political science: practices and principles. Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Lynch, Julia. “Tracking Progress While in the Field in Symposium: Field

Research” Qualitative Methods: Newsletter of the Organized Section on Qualitative Methods of the APSA vol.2 no.1 (Spring 2004): 10-15.

Malejacq, R., & Mukhopadhyay, D. (2016). The ‘Tribal Politics’ of Field

Research: A Reflection on Power and Partiality in 21st-Century Warzones. Perspectives on Politics, 14(4), 1011-1028.

8.     Interviews, Surveys, and Beyond (exercise 3.)

Callahan, William A. "The visual turn in IR: documentary filmmaking as a critical

method." Millennium 43.3 (2015): 891-910.

Dillman, Don A. "Chapter 9: The logic and psychology of constructing

questionnaires." International handbook of survey methodology (2008):

161-175.

Kapiszewski, Diana, Lauren M. MacLean, and Benjamin L. “Chapter 6:

Interviews, oral histories, and focus groups,” Chapter 7: Site-intensive methods: ethnography and participant observation,” in Field research in political science: practices and principles. Cambridge University Press, 2015.

9.     Discourse and Content Analysis

Bennett, Andrew. "Found in translation: Combining discourse analysis with

computer assisted content analysis." Millennium 43.3 (2015): 984-997.

Chandler, David. "A world without causation: Big data and the coming of age of

posthumanism." Millennium-Journal of International Studies 43.3 (2015): 833-851.

   Huiyun, Feng. "Is China a revisionist power?" The Chinese Journal of

International Politics 2.3 (2009): 313-334.

   Herrera, Yoshiko M., and Bear F. Braumoeller, eds. "Symposium: Discourse and

Content Analysis." Qualitative Methods: Newsletter of the Organized Section on Qualitative Methods of the APSA vol.2 no.1 (Spring 2004): 15-25.

10.  Case Studies (exercise 4.)

George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. “Chapter 1: Case Studies and Theory

Development” in Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. “Chapter 3: The Method of

Structured, Focused Comparison” in Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

Rueschemeyer, Dietrich. "Can One or A Few Cases Yield Theoretical Gains?" In

Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, edited by James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Sambanis, Nicholas. "Using case studies to expand economic models of civil

war." Perspectives on Politics 2.02 (2004): 259-279.

11.  Process Tracing

George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett. “Chapter 10: Process-Tracing and

Historical Explanation” in Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005.

Jacobs, Alan M. "Chapter 2: Process-tracing the Effects of Ideas" in Bennett,

Andrew and Jeffrey T. Checkel, eds. Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Checkel, Jeffrey T. "Chapter 3: Mechanisms, process and the study of

international institutions" in Bennett, Andrew and Jeffrey T. Checkel, eds.

Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. New York: Cambridge

University Press, 2014.

12.  Historical Comparison, Critical Juncture, and Path Dependence

James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. “Comparative Historical Analysis:

Achievements and Agendas” in Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, edited by James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Mahoney, James. "Strategies of Causal Assessment in Comparative Historical

Analysis" in Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, edited by James Mahoney and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

   Pierson, Paul. "Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of

politics." American political science review 94.02 (2000): 251-267.

13.  Mixed Methods (email your Research Design Paper to all others)

Dunning, Thad. “Chapter 8: Improving process tracing: the case of multi-method

research” in Bennett, Andrew and Jeffrey T. Checkel, eds.

Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool. New York: Cambridge

University Press, 2014.

Lieberman, Evan S. "Nested analysis as a mixed-method strategy for

comparative research." American Political Science Review 99.03 (2005): 435-452.

Sidney Tarrow. “Bridging the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide.” In Rethinking

Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, edited by Henry E. Brady

and David Collier. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

14.  Student Presentations

Research Design Paper Due