Lecture 2 - only the reading will be tested Flashcards
Theories, concepts, hypotheses
The concept of theory
it is an abstract term, when filling it in ->
Used in different ways that are incompatible
+ are often undefined
Definition of theory
abstract definition:
a systematic and organized set of ideas that help understand and analyze political phenomena
What is the purpose of theory?
What is it for?
- understanding and analyzing political phenomena
- bridge what we observe in the political world and how we explain or understand these (e.g. normative theories)
- not all theories are created equal: they differ in scope, focus, and how they’re applied
textbook on empirical theory definition
+ criticism
a general set of explanatory claims about some specifiable empirical range
- doesn’t work for all types of theory: only focuses on explanation (specific to positivist empirical theories)
explanation
trying to identify necessary and specific reasons as to why things happen
What theoretical approahes are there
- behaviouralism
- rational choice
- (neo-) institutionalism
- constructivism
- marxism
- feminism
- normative political theory
all these approaches have different views on theory
normative vs. empirical theories
normative theory =
- ethical and value-driven (often stemming from philosophy
- seek to evaluate or prescribe
- generalized set of categories that helps generate normative claims
e.g. liberal theory -> normative claims
empirical theory =
- grounded in observation, data collection, and factual analysis
- seek to explain or understand
how is behaviouralism a theoretical approach?
is it a thin theory?
methodological
emphasizes observable and measurable behaviors
- context of voting patterns and public opinion
thin theory: not substantive (it doesn’t offer expectations), rather it is methodological: it says that we can/should identify patters (human behavior follows patterns)
- it makes epistemological and ontological claims rather than that it offers concrete/substantive expectations/explanations
rational choice theory
works from the assumption that individuals often engage in politics based on calculated decisions, aiming to maximize their interest
substantive expectation: people will behave in calculated way
empirical + positivist observation
institutionalism
highlights formal structures, institutions, and procedures play a central role in shaping political actions and outcomes
ambivalent in terms of interpretivism and positivism
substantive theory: self-interest maximalization
positivism
geared towards providing causal explanations with the goal of explaining behavior
hermeneutic approach
no such thing as generalized pattern behavior
internal reasons for action -> no generalized patterns possible -> no predictions possible
political science should be to understand specific cases, how they see/interpret their own behavior
generally: skeptical about the quantification of phenomena
constructivism
underscores how politics is deeply influenced by shared beliefs, norms and ideas
generally: most constructivists will reject that behavior can be isolated into statistics in a way to generate expectations and predictions, pattern identification is impossible on a great scale
complication to ……
free choice -> two identical people in identical circumstances can still take other actions
- agency
marxism
normative + empirical theory
stresses politics as an arena of class struggle, rooted in economic determinism and power dynamics
critical realism
feminism
can be normative and empirical
focus on gender relations, patriarchal structures, and the fight for gender equality within the political sphere
can be positivist and interpretivist
hypothesis meaning
a specific prediction, derived from a theory, that can be tested against empirical evidence
= by meaning positivist empirical approach (empirical positivist theories are dominant in political science)
testing hypotheses
via falsification
Popper; trying to prove a claim that all swans are white, we can’t prove that positively by looking at white swans: we’ll never see all of them, even if we were able to we couldn’t go to the past -> no definitive answer. We should try to reject a hypothesis
can hypotheses be proven correct?
no
the more often you fail to disprove a hypothesis, it is more likely to be correct, but a theory can never be proven to be correct
alternatives to testing hypotheses
- interpretative inquiry
- thick description (Geertz): not causal explanations, but trying to understand a phenomena by describing its novel features in rich detail
- critical theory, including Marxist, feminist and post-colonial perspectives
- normative analysis
substantive assumption vs. methodological assumption
the basics
substantive =
based on content of people behavior
- makes certain assumptions about human nature
e.g. rational choice theory (people behave in self-interest) + institutionalist (
methodological assumption =
human behavior overall, how to research it
what is a concept in political science
points of reference, to capture and communicate specific political phenomena or ideas
conceptualization = articulating concepts
- to compare
they are abstract categories or representations that we compose on the world
how do we decide if something is a good concept or a bad concept?
- clarity
- coherence: concepts can be easily understood without multiple possible interpretations
- logically consistency: elements of concepts shouldn’t logically conflict + related concepts must be mutually illegible
- usefulness: concept should add value to discussions, comparisons, and even policy-making (the clearer it is, the more useful it is)
*usefulness is also: when you take a definition that doesn’t match with the broad acceptance, it isn’t useful
concepts are contested
concepts don’t exist in the world, we make them
people have different definitions of concepts
when researching -> study the literature for definitions, pick one, or introduce a new one
be clear which definition you take
operationalization
processs of making concepts measurable
*particularly important for empirical theories
!!we shouldn’t ‘retro-fit’ concepts to what we happen to be able to measure easily
it is important that operational measures truly reflect the core essence of a concept (though there can be pragmatic concessions)
good definition of populism
e.g. proffessor
political approach or movement characterized by a charismatic leader and direct appeals to the masses, emphasizing the interests of ordinary people, contrasted to an entrenched, corrupt elite
bad definition of populism
e.g.
when a political leader exploits the emotions of ordinary people, like when Donald Trump gave election speeches accusing Hillary Clinton of criminal behavior
populism as an ideational concept
+ criticism
thin-centered ideology that considers society to be separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups ‘‘the pure people’’ and ‘‘the corrupt elite’’ (Mudde)
thin: not much substantive commitments (idea that society is divided between elites and masses)
criticism:
- is it internally consistent? : ideology and thin/empty?
populism as discourse
an anti-status quo discourse that simplifies the political space by symbolically dividing society between the people and its ‘other’
focus on discourse: written and spoken words of populists (not on ideology)
criticism:
- populism measured in words, is it useful , does it not miss useful visual, aesthetic and performative cues of populist politics
populism as an organizational concept
political strategy through which a personalistic leader seeks or exercises government power based on direct, unmediated, uninstitutionalized suport from large numbers of mostly unorganized followers (Weyland)
criticism:
- if it is limited like that, what do we do with actors that are often described as populist that are highly structured, formalized political actors
populism as a stylistic concept
performative political style that features:
- appeals to the people versus the elite
- bad manners
- performance of crisis, breakdown or threat
(Moffit)
criticism: ‘bad manners’ criterion self-referential?
- Can it be sufficiently clear and
consistent in different contexts?
