|
HU Credits:
2
Degree/Cycle:
2nd degree (Master)
Responsible Department:
Political Science
Semester:
2nd Semester
Teaching Languages:
Hebrew
Campus:
Mt. Scopus
Course/Module Coordinator:
Professor Alon Peled
Coordinator Office Hours:
Monday 1000-1100, room 4316
Teaching Staff:
Dr. Alon Peled
Course/Module description:
The first part of the course is designed to develop students' skills in critical reading of academic research and in academic writing. The second part is an introduction to research methods with emphasis on advantages and disadvantages of methods to different types of research questions.
Course/Module aims:
Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
1. Read academic studies critically.
2. Meet the requirements for writing an academic research.
3. Indicate the advantages and disadvantages of research methods to different types of research questions.
Attendance requirements(%):
80%
Teaching arrangement and method of instruction:
Course/Module Content:
Lecture 1: Scientific Research - Principles and Goals
Lecture 2: Research Design
Lecture 3: Reading and writing research articles
Qualitative research methods:
Lecture 4: Case Study
Lecture 5: Comparative analysis and case selection
Lecture 6: Content analysis and interviews
Quantitative Research Methods:
Lecture 7: Formal analysis and model definition
Lecture 8: Observational study: surveys
Lecture 9: Laboratory experiments and Survey experiments
Lecture 10: Field experiments and natural experiments
Lecture 11: Panel study and Longitudinal analysis
Lecture 12: Time series analysis and survival analysis
Lecture 13: Summary of the course
Required Reading:
Lecture 1:
Hancké (2009), Chapter 1 [pp. 14-33]
Lecture 2:
Hancké (2009), Chapter 2 [pp. 34-53]
King et al. (1994), Chapter 1 [pp. 1-33]
Lecture 3:
Jordan, Christian H. and Mark P. Zanna. 2003. Appendix: How to Read a Journal Article in Social Psychology, In Arie W. Kruglanski and E. Tory Kiggins (Eds.) Social Psychology: General Reader, New York, NY: Psychology Press
King, Gary. 2006. Publication, Publication, PS: Political Science & Politics, 39: 119-125
Lecture 4:
Munck, Geraldo L. 2004. Tools for Qualitative Research, In Henry E. Brady and David Collier (Eds.) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield
Gerring, John. 2004. What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? American Political Science Review 98(2): 341-354
Lecture 5:
Hancké (2009), pp. 63-74
Sokoloff, Kenneth L. and Stanley L. Engerman. 2000. "History Lessons: Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(3): 217-232.
Lecture 6:
שקדי, אשר. 2003. "ראיון העומק", בתוך: מילים המנסות לגעת: מחקר איכותני- תיאוריה ויישום. עמ'69-79. תל אביב: הוצאת רמות.
Shenhav, Shaul R. 2007. Detecting Stories: Revealing hidden ‘voices’ in public political discourse, Journal of Language and Politics 6(2): 177-200
Lecture 7:
Fiorina, Morris. 1975. Formal Models in Political Science, American Journal of Political Science, 19: 133-159
Taagepera, Rein. 2008. Making Social Sciences More Scientific, Oxford: Oxford University Press; chapters 3-4 (pp. 23-51).
Lecture 8:
Javeline, Debra. 2003. The Role of Blame in Collective Action: Evidence from Russia, American Political Science Review, 97(1): 107-121
Huber, John, Charles Shipan and Pfahler. 2001. Legislatures and Statutory Control of Bureaucracy. American Journal of Political Science 45(2): 330-45.
Lecture 9:
Palfrey, Thomas R. 2009. Laboratory Experiment in Political Economy, Annual Review of Political Science 12: 379-388.
Sulitzeanu-Kenan, Raanan and Eran Halperin. 2013. Making a Difference: Political Efficacy and Policy Preference Construction, British Journal of Political Science 43(2): 295-322.
Lecture 10:
Elizabeth Levy Paluck. 2009. Deference, Dissent, and Dispute Resolution: An Experimental Intervention Using Mass Media to Change Norms and Behavior in Rwanda. American Political Science Review, 103(4): 622-644.
Urbatsch, R. 2011. Sibling Ideological Influence: A Natural Experiment, British Journal of Political Science 41: 693-712.
Lecture 11:
Zapf, Dieter, Christian Dormann, and Michael Frese. 1996. Longitudinal studies in Organizational Stress Research: A Review of the Literature with Reference to Methodological Issues, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1(2): 145-169
Sulitzeanu-Kenan, Raanan. 2007. Scything the grass: agenda-setting consequences of appointing public inquiries in the UK. A longitudinal analysis, Policy & Politics, 35(4): 629-650
Lecture 12:
Soroka, Stuart N. 2002. ‘Issue attributes and agenda-setting by media, the public, and policymakers in Canada’, International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14(3): 264–85
Smith, Alastair. 2003. Election Timing in Majoritarian Parliaments, British Journal of Political Science, 33: 397-418
Lecture 14:
Manoney, James and Gary Goertz. 2006. A Tale of Two Cultures: Contrasting Quantitative and Qualitative Research, Political Analysis 14: 227-249
Additional Reading Material:
Relevant books for the course:
Angrist, Joshua D. and Jörn-Steffen Pischke. 2009. Mostly Harmless Econometrics,
Princeton: Princeton University Press
Hancké, Bob. 2009. Intelligent Research Design: A guide for beginning researchers in the social sciences, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Henry E. Brady and David Collier. 2004. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield
King, Gary, Robert Keohane and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry, Princeton: Princeton University Press
Lieblich, A. Tuval-Mashiach, R. And Ilber, T. 1998. Narrative Research: Reading, Analysis and Interpretation, Thousand Oaks, CA, London: Sage
Mishler, E. G. 1986. Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative, London: Harvard
University Press
Shadish, William R., Thomas D. Cook and Donald T. Campbell. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs: for generalized causal inference, Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin
Silverman, David. 2001. Interpreting Qualitative Data (2nd Edition) Sage
Course/Module evaluation:
End of year written/oral examination 40 %
Presentation 0 %
Participation in Tutorials 10 %
Project work 0 %
Assignments 50 %
Reports 0 %
Research project 0 %
Quizzes 0 %
Other 0 %
Additional information:
The course program may change by lecturer's decision, including changing of the exercises specified in the syllabus.
|
