Reasons for the development of the experimental method in contemporary Political Science
Main Article Content
Abstract
With the advent of the twentieth century, technological advance and the development in various areas of knowledge led to some changes in the design of the study of science. In the current paradigm, there is a constant commitment in the political science with the issue of causal inference. The experimental method has clear ability to claim causal relationships between variables of interest. Thus, it presents as a pragmatic method for improving theories. We will examine, in this study, the reasons that have motivated growing interest by researchers in the methodology.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
How to Cite
Almeida, S. K. O. de. (2016). Reasons for the development of the experimental method in contemporary Political Science. Revista Latinoamericana De Metodología De Las Ciencias Sociales (ReLMeCS), 6(1), e002. Retrieved from https://www.relmecs.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/article/view/relmecs_v06n01a02
Issue
Section
Artículos
Obra disponible bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.es).
References
Almond, G. (1996). Political Science: The History of the Discipline. In Goodin and Klingemann (pp. 50-96).
Almond, G. & S. J. Genco (1977). Clouds, Clocks , and the Study of Politics. World Politics.
Barabas, J. & J. Jerit (2010). Survey Experiments and the External Validity of Treatments. American Political Science Review, 104 (2): 226-242.
Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (4th Edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., and Lupia, A. (2006). The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science. American Political Science Review, 100 (4): 627-635.
Druckman, J. N. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? Journal of Politics, 63 (4): 1041-1066.
Dunning, T. (2008) Improving Causal Inference: Strengths and Limitations of Natural Experiments. Political Research Quarterly, 61; 282.
Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., and Quirk, P. J. (2007). The logic of the survey experiment revisited. Political Analysis, 15 (1): 1-20.
Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (1999). The underprovision of experiments in political science. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 589 (Sep): 94-112.
Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (2002). The Downstream Benefits of experimentation. Political Analysis, 10:4.
King, G., Keohane, R., Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mcdermott, R. (2002). Experimental Methodology in Political Science. Political analyses. Political Analysis, 10 (4): 325-342.
Morton, R., Williams, K. (2006). Experimentation in Political Science. The Oxford Handbook Of Political Methodology, pp.02-27.
Morton, R., Williams, K. (2009). From Nature to the Lab: The Methodology of Experimental Political Science. Nova York: Cambridge University Press.
Paluck, E. (2010). The promising integration of field experimentation and qualitative methods. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 628: 5971.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Rezende, F. (2012). Nova Metodologia Qualitativa e as Condições Essenciais de Demarcação entre Desenhos de Pesquisa na Ciência Política Comparada. Política Hoje, pp. 218-252.
Almond, G. & S. J. Genco (1977). Clouds, Clocks , and the Study of Politics. World Politics.
Barabas, J. & J. Jerit (2010). Survey Experiments and the External Validity of Treatments. American Political Science Review, 104 (2): 226-242.
Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (4th Edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., Kuklinski, J. H., and Lupia, A. (2006). The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science. American Political Science Review, 100 (4): 627-635.
Druckman, J. N. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? Journal of Politics, 63 (4): 1041-1066.
Dunning, T. (2008) Improving Causal Inference: Strengths and Limitations of Natural Experiments. Political Research Quarterly, 61; 282.
Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., and Quirk, P. J. (2007). The logic of the survey experiment revisited. Political Analysis, 15 (1): 1-20.
Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (1999). The underprovision of experiments in political science. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 589 (Sep): 94-112.
Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (2002). The Downstream Benefits of experimentation. Political Analysis, 10:4.
King, G., Keohane, R., Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mcdermott, R. (2002). Experimental Methodology in Political Science. Political analyses. Political Analysis, 10 (4): 325-342.
Morton, R., Williams, K. (2006). Experimentation in Political Science. The Oxford Handbook Of Political Methodology, pp.02-27.
Morton, R., Williams, K. (2009). From Nature to the Lab: The Methodology of Experimental Political Science. Nova York: Cambridge University Press.
Paluck, E. (2010). The promising integration of field experimentation and qualitative methods. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 628: 5971.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Rezende, F. (2012). Nova Metodologia Qualitativa e as Condições Essenciais de Demarcação entre Desenhos de Pesquisa na Ciência Política Comparada. Política Hoje, pp. 218-252.