Does quantitative methodology have an optimistic future in the study of political science? The answer is positive. But it doesn’t mean that using quantitative methods are panaceas for every research puzzle. Applying this methodology has several principles and limits. Whether the future of quantitative methodology is bright depends on its internal capability as we as its external possibility. The contents of this paper are fourfold. The first part will introduce the definition of quantitative methodology. a clear understanding of the definition of methodology would provide political scientists with a sound background knowledge and also diminish the danger of researchers wasting their time. The second part will explain three advantages of quantitative methodology. Correspondingly, the third part will illustrate three disadvantages of quantitative methodology. Finally, combining with the first three parts, the optimistic future of quantitative methodology in political science will be divided into two parts: the internal capability and the external possibility. …show more content…
The ontology of positivism is that the world is external , which can only be studied by observation and measurement. So positivists believe that reality is stable and can be observed and described from an objective viewpoint. After the scientific revolution of social science in 1960s, more and more social scientists thought that social sciences can be built upon the same model as the natural sciences as well. Those scholars, in IR researchers, started using empirical methodology to analyze their subjects. Because in positivists eyes that social scientific inquiry should be objective and empirical, which with the goad of systematization of sociology. In the research field of international relations, quantitative study follows the logic of positivism. As Bruce Berg identified that quantitative research is a positivistic
For social sciences majors, reading this book can provide a look at exactly what biases there are in the field we are hoping to enter, and what mistakes are commonly made. It provides a long list of examples of ways in which numbers can be messed up, and is a good warning to those of us wanting to be social scientists.
Shapiro, Ian, Rogers M. Smith, and Tarek E. Masoud, eds. Problems and Methods in the Study of Politics. Cambridge ; Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Association (2003): 31-36. Cambridge Journals Online. American Political Science Association, 30 Jan. 2003. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
- Look over scholarly articles, books, etc and determine what respected political scientists would have done
According to Smith (1983) quantitative research is to explain, predict and develop laws that can be universally applied and Qualitative research is the interpretation and understanding of what people give to their situation. The researchers clearly stated the purpose of their studies, aim, objectiv...
Many sociologist come to a disagreement and different approaches to the Sociological concept of positivism and antipositivism. Positivism is the scientific study of social patterns. This pertains to the use of scientific methods to get a more clear understanding of the natural world. Auguste Comte was the founder of this concept. Comte believed the way that society interacts with individuals using positivism would usher in a new “positivist” age of history. Comte concept of positivism is still relevant today. Since then positivism has been expanded and became the foundation for quantitative sociology. Quantitative sociology is the use of empirical evidence to gain an understanding of human patterns and behavior. For example, surveys with a large amount of participants, and other statistical techniques are used in Quantitative sociology according to “Introduction to society”.
Hague, R., Harrop, M. & Breslin, S. 1992. Political Science: A Comparative Introduction. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Many companies use quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate innovative projects. In this paper I will discuss these methods as they relate to UNICEF and their desire to improve their ability to communicate in rural areas where they go to provide disaster relief.
In social research, researchers are always confronting with a vast majority of options for opting the research methods. Among all of the existing research methods, quantitative and qualitative research paradigms appear to be the most celebrated methods for the majority of the social researchers. However, social researchers (e.g. David and Sutton, 2004; Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004) have argued for many decades with regards to the differentiated nature and ideologies of the terms ‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ within social research. Some researchers (e.g. Ayer, 1959; Schrag, 1992; Maxwell and Delaney, 2004) who advocate quantitative research uphold a ‘positivist philosophy’, that objective social science observation is desirable and that the determined scientific outcomes need to be valid and reliable (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004:14). In this sense, research quantitatively denotes that research intends to quantify the
Positivism Paradigm is considered the “scientific method”; Interpretivist Paradigm approaches understanding using the world of “human experience”. Critical and Transformative researchers "believe that inquiry needs to be intertwined with politics and a political agenda" (Creswell, 2003, p.9). Pragmatism theorists are not committed to any specific system of philosophy or model that use the most relevant theory applicable to their research. Understanding paradigms is essential to preparing for dissertation research. Paradigms provide a framework to write and explain my philosophies, accurately support the data compiled and structure the narrative research. Selecting the paradigm will determine if the research will include qualitative data, quantitative data or a mixed method which will incorporate a blended method approach. Choosing an incorrect approach can lead to research flaws and
numbers to influence public opinion. Stone discusses how “Numbers are used to tell stories… [and] the power to measure is the power to control. Measures have a lot of discretion in their choice of what and how to measure.” This can become very dangerous because when politicians present the public with data, they could present as much or as little data as they see fit and then they utilize that selective data to tell stories to sway public opinion.
Primary source data collection relies on structured interviews and questionnaires, which many argue do not offer enough fluidity to relate to everyday lives and therefore are not valid research tools (Bryman 2001, p.77). Critics also continue to associate positivism and quantitative methods failing to see that quantitative researchers do not apply the scientific method to all data and can account for influencing variables (Bryman 2001, p.77; Matthews and Ross 2010, p.29). Quantitative methods in the social sciences were highlighted by the positivist epistemology during the mid 20th century; however, Jones (2010) explains how the principles of positivist epistemology are not fully consistent with modern quantitative methods in the social sciences (Matthews and Ross 2010, p.27). Positivist research parallels that of the natural sciences, where data collection and hypothesis testing is conducted from information that can be observed and recorded by the senses (Matthews and Ross 2010, p.27). Because information can only be observed, positivists look for regularities and explain causation when one event regularly follows another, which is why many will criticize quantitative methods if they associate them with the positivist approach to research (Jones
Positivism is a research method that developed from the behavioral revolution, which sought to combine positivism and empiricism to politics (Halperin and Heath, 2012: 27). That is to say, this research approach is governed by natural law to observe, understand and to find meaning in the empirical world. This type of research seeks to answer two empirical questions, such as ‘what is out there’ and ‘what do we call it’ (Gerring, 2001: 156). Positivism is only interested in phenomenons that can be observed through our senses. Thus, positivism is interested in social realities that can be observed and measured by the scientific method (Halperin and Heath, 2012: 29). Furthermore, positivism believes that the gathering of evidence through scientific method can create knowledge and laws, known as induction (Halperin and Heath, 2012: 27). That is to say, evidence can be verified and later generalized then applied to multiple contexts. A positivist would investigate empirical questions that assume how the world works through the accuracy of a probable truth (Gerring, 2001: 155).
Traditional research may use quantitative or qualitative research method. According to Hendricks (2009), quantitative research is a general conclusion based on hard data. Hen-dricks describe quantitativ...
Political scientists study the origin, development, and operation of political systems, and complex social organizations. They research political ideas and analyze governments, policies, political trends, and related issues. A political scientist is different from a political philosopher who explains theoretically the consistency of power, its acquisition and its proper use to preserve it. Political scientists are also different from politicians who are the practitioners of the public administration and holders of power. Thus, the political scientist is fundamentally an analyst and researcher of how political philosophers and politicians shape the human societies through their actions and ideas as reflected in policies and structures of power.