A Research Study Method Of General Or Midrange Comparative Politics Theories

In the United States, public policy is shaped by multiple factors, from average citizens voices in elections to interest groups and organizations. In their study, “Testing theories of American politics”, scholars Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens explore the impact of average citizens, the economic elite and interest groups have on the passage of public policy. Additionally through their, Page and Gilens(2014) have found “that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence” (Pg 535). This means that when it comes to the creation of public policies, rich people and groups

Comparative politics is the empirical comparative study of political systems. It involves the classification and comparison of institutions - ‘a rule that has been institutionalised’ (Lane and Ersson, 1999: 23) - in order to determine the nature of political regimes. The study of comparative politics has come to be guided by three major research schools: rational choice theory, culturalist analysis and structuralist approaches; each of which spearhead a distinctive notion over what about institutions affects the nature of the political process. Rationalists are methodological individualists who assert that

However, it is important to consider the political climate of the time when passing judgement. The aim of this analysis is to explore

The purpose of this paper is intended to summarize my views on what has influenced my understanding of politics and government prior to taking this class, and how my understanding is now since completing this course.

Government structures are imperative to having a manageable state of civilization. However, these structures face several difficulties and conflicts. The complex human activity of resolving these conflicts is called politics. According to Bernard Crick, in his book, “In Defense of Politics” he defends this activity and further defines it as a conflict resolution through the process of deliberation, compromise, and listening for the common welfare of the whole community. It is a unified contribution to government that is not solely based on one interest (21). Also, Crick further defends politics from the practice of technology, nationalism, and democracy. Additionally, although it is often assumed politics is done in all governments from local to foreign, in the contrary, all governments don’t adhere to this activity defined by Crick. In fact, with our current president, Donald Trump, based on the actions he has taken so far, he is anti-political.

Keeping this in mind, we must understand that this only tells half the story. In order to expand upon the ideas introduced in prior research, a quantitative element should be added. By doing this, we add a level of validity to the existing research while answering questions in the political science community that could be extremely valuable to

Over the years, political scientists have expressed their disapproval of American elections. They have openly stated that presidential elections do not matter. The reason being, is that they believe the outcome of elections is a result of forces outside of the campaigner’s influence. For example, the state of the economy, partisan loyalties, and normative, communicative, and symbolic roles are all disconnected from the influence of the campaigner. The latter mentioned aspects (anthropological), according to political scientists, receive little attention from scholars, but their impacts are very substantial. They restore confidence in governing institutions, result in an upsurge in mutual feelings, and give the citizenry hope of a better governing body after elections

Chris Hyler PSC 123 Professor Sezgin (TA: Li Shao) 11/29/2014 The collapses of the Iranian monarchy and the Soviet Union resulted in the establishment of two of the world’s most prominent nations. The similarities between the two nations can be seen in multiple areas. First, historically both nations were at one time under the rule of totalitarian regimes.

Bone A. H., 1958. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 319, pp. 83-319.

The political spectrum reveals more than what meets the eye. In the United States, a politician is typically either left or right; there is often no middle ground. Because of this, she or he is either liberal (Democratic) or conservative (Republican). So where does that leave those who share values and policies as those on each side? A politician’s position on the political spectrum is determined by his or her beliefs and policies on several issues, including the government’s involvement in both social policies and the economy. In European politics, the political spectrum is rather a multi-dimensional space where positions vary based on the state’s or government’s involvement; an ideology ranges from authoritarian to individualistic and has

Political science is a broad topic that covers the history, political and geographical aspect of the world. The course started with a revision on the basics of the constitution, types of power and the political scene that happens around us. My first year at the University, one of the compulsory subject that is required for arts taking students is Political Science 1101. After several years of taking social or political course, taking this course opened my knowledge towards politics and the political scene in Canada. It also taught me about how different ways of information taking could lead to one learning differently from others. For example this class gave us the opportunity to use our laptops as a source of note taking, this helped me learn in which whenever a new vocabulary comes up during the class discussions i could search it up. Through “The Road to Patriation” and Kim Campbell “Through the Looking Glass” i would further emphasize my ideas on what i have learnt throughout the course semester.

It is worth stating that to assess the quality of social science research; four criteria of evaluation can be applied: validity, reliability, comprehensiveness (generalization) and coherence (objectivity) (Hugh 2001:49). These criteria have been found to be more applicable to quantitative. However,

This paper will critically evaluate the methodology used in Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. By relying on what the methodological arguments that were taught this semester, this paper will discuss and evaluate in detail the various methodological strategies employed by the author. For the ‘Theory’ theme, this paper will examine casual mechanisms (and methodological individualism) topic, closely referencing the course reading Social Mechanisms by Peter Hedstrom and Richard Swedbeg. Next, for the ‘Measurement and Data’ theme, this paper will specifically examine the measurement validity and reliability topic, and will closely reference “Measurement validity: A Shared Standard for qualitative and Quantitative Research” by Robert Adcock and David Colllier. Finally, for the ‘Testing Theory with Data Theory’, this paper will be examining the history as an explanation topic, closely referencing “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Historical Intuitionalism” by Giovanni Capoccia and Daniel Kelemen, as well as the relevant topic, Quantitative versus Qualitative Methods. The paper will start by summarizing the readings relevant to the topics of the themes, then delve into the pertinent methodology in Putnam’s book.

Rational choice theory is actually more than one theory per se, but the basic similarities among its variants mean that they can be intelligibly amalgamated for the purposes of critiquing its implementation in political science. Therefore public choice theory, positive political science, rational actor models, and the economic approach to politics, among others, refer to what we may call rational choice theory for the purposes of this essay. (See Green and Shapiro 1994, xi.

The study of politics had its roots in philosophy and while there has been a drive to steer the study of politics towards a more scientific approach, many scholars like Max Weber believe that social sciences cannot simply imitate the natural sciences. This essay will examine the various approaches to applying scientific methodology to the study of politics and it will specifically explore Behaviorism, Positivism and Interpretivism and by looking at each methodology briefly explore the advantages and disadvantages of each method.