- Learning objectives (bullet-point list of brief items)



The Comparative Study of Politics

I. Learning Objectives

The overarching goal of this chapter is for students to understand the main concepts and methods related to the comparative study of politics.

Related to this goal are several more specific objectives, which are grouped below according to their place in chapter.

Understanding Politics by Comparing

• understand the nature of Comparative politics as a sub-field of Political Science

Concepts in the Comparative Study of Politics

• understand a basic definition of ‘politics’

• understand the concept of ‘power’ and related terms, especially ‘authority’

Political Science as a Science

• understand the process of obtaining ‘scientific knowledge’ in the Political Science, as well as understand related issued, such as causal relationships among variables

• understand the nature of the scientific method in Political Science regarding research questions, hypotheses, theories, conceptualizing and operationalizing variables, and data collection

Methods of Comparing to Understand Politics

• understand different approaches in Comparative politics regarding the levels of analysis, how many cases to examine, and what forms of data to collect and study

A Framework for the Comparative Study of Politics: “Structure versus Choice”

• understand the ‘structural’ and ‘choice’ approaches in the study of Comparative politics

• understand how these approaches will be used in this book

II. Chapter Outline

1. Introduction

• Learning Objectives

• Understanding Politics by Comparing

-This section introduces the sub-field of Political Science, known as Comparative politics and describes the nature of research performed by comparativists.

2. Concepts in the Comparative Study of Politics

-This section begins by arguing that the definition of key concepts is crucial to the work of comparativists.

• Politics: Who Gets What, When, and How

-This section defines ‘politics’ as “a set of activities that help organize individuals, systematically resolve disputes, and maintain order in society.” These activities include “passing and enforcing laws governing individual behavior, mobilizing and channeling mass participation, and socializing individuals to support the political system and the values on which it is based.”

• Power: How People Get What They Want

-This section introduces the concept of ‘power,’ which is explained in the following sub-sections:

o Power as Influence – Power involves influence: getting people to do what you want them to do. The concept of power as influence includes the idea that one person in a power relationship can overcome the resistance of another.

o Power as Capabilities – Rather than looking for an actual instance of one person influencing another as it is taking place, the political scientist instead looks at the abilities a person might posses that allow him or her to get another person to do what he or she wants the person to do. In other words, thinking about power as capabilities allows political scientists to look for tangible, easier to measure indicators of power.

o Coercive versus Non-coercive Power

-This section stresses that power can result from rewards/punishments, as well as from ‘authority.’ This, in turn, may have three sources: traditional, charismatic, and legal.

With coercive power, a person is objected because of the rewards and/or punishments at his or her disposal.

Noncoercive power rests on a different foundation. In this case, power results from a sense of legitimacy. Legitimacy is the belief in the right of an individual, a political system, or the state to rule. The belief in a right to rule does not mean that all government decisions are supported.

Max Weber

Early twentieth century sociologist

Known for his ideas about power and the state

Weber’s Three Types of Authority:

Legal authority is based on a system of rules that is applied administratively and judicially in accordance with known principles. The persons who administer those rules are appointed or elected by legal procedures. Superiors are also subject to rules that limit their powers, separate their private lives from official duties and require written documentation

Traditional authority is based on a system in which authority is legitimate because it "has always existed". People in power usually enjoy it because they have inherited it. Officials consist either of personal retainers (in a patrimonial regime) or of personal loyal allies, such as vassals or tributary lords (in a feudal regime). Their prerogatives are usually similar to those of the ruler above them, just reduced in scale, and they too are often selected based on inheritance.

Charismatic authority is based on the charisma of the leader, who shows that he possesses the right to lead by virtue of magical powers, prophecies, heroism, etc. His followers respect his right to lead because of his unique qualities (his charisma), not because of any tradition or legal rules. Officials consist of those who have shown personal devotion to the ruler, and of those who possess their own charisma.

3. Political Science as a Science

• Scientific Research and Scientific Knowledge

-This section seeks to clarify how Political Science is, indeed, a science. ‘Science’ is defined as the “undertaking of a particular form of systematic study to better understand events and processes.”

-A Deepening Your Understanding feature noted here and found on the companion website explains that “scientific knowledge is considered reliable because it is empirical, transmissible, and non-normative.” Each of these three terms is discussed.

• The Scientific Method

-This section outlines the key elements of the scientific method as related to Comparative politics. These elements are discussed in the following sub-sections:

o Research Questions

-This entails a puzzle that a researcher finds interesting.

o Hypotheses and the Use of Theories as “Hypothesis Generators”

-Theories are described as generators of hypotheses, which can be defined as testable claims based on existing theories and logic. Proper hypotheses must be falsifiable and should not be tautologies.

o Conceptualizing and Operationalizing Variables

-Conceptualization refers to the definition of key terms related to a hypothesis. Operationalization refers to how key terms (such as variables) will be measured during the testing of a hypothesis.

o Collecting and Analyzing Data About the Variables

-The collection and analysis of data should conform to standards that differ across scientific disciplines.

-A Deepening Your Understanding feature noted here and found on the companion website distinguishes between the role of induction and deduction to (respectively) test and modify existing theories and explain specific events.

• How Scientific is Political Science?

-This section outlines several challenges faced by Political Scientists, such problems with conducting testing without the benefit of controlled laboratories, the definition of key terms, the measurement of variables, and the complexity of the political phenomena under examination. Despite these challenges, political science research should be “as scientific as possible.”

4. Methods of Comparing to Understand Politics

-This section examines three questions to address when designing a research project: what level(s) of analysis to employ, how many cases to examine, and what form(s) of data to collect and study.

• Levels of Analysis

-In Comparative politics, there are a number of possibilities, including regions, groups, and individuals within countries. However, the common level of analysis is the State.

• The Number of Cases

-The term “quantitative study” is often reserved for ‘large-n’ studies (i.e., large number of cases) that allow statistical analysis of data. ‘Qualitative’ studies’ involve a small number of cases.

o Case Studies

-The examination of a single case in-depth allows for ‘thick description,’ which affords ‘internal validity’ of the findings. Although case studies are weak on ‘external validity,’ they can facilitate ‘deviant case studies’ and ‘critical case studies,’ which can contribute a lot to theoretical research.

o Quantitative (Statistical) Analysis

-These studies involve a large number of cases. Statistical software is often used to analyze data, which allows researchers to control one variable while evaluating the effects of another. Large sample sizes afford greater external validity of the findings.

o The Comparative Method

-This is the cornerstone of research in Comparative Politics. This method involves a small number of cases, but the careful selection of these cases helps to control for certain variables while evaluating the effects of others. The ‘most similar’ approach involves the selection of cases that are very much alike in most regards, aside from a key independent variable that might explain the dependent variable under study. The ‘most different’ approach entails selecting cases that differ in some ways – aside one independent variable, such that the relationship of that factor to the dependent variable can be examined with some confidence. ‘Cross-regional’ approaches examine sets of countries from different world regions, combining elements of the

most similar and most different methods.

5. A Framework for the Comparative Study of Politics: “Structure versus. Choice”

-This section introduces the two broad approaches used in this book. The ‘structural approach’ to the study of Comparative politics focuses on the broader setting in which individuals make political decisions. This focuses on economic, social, or political structures. The ‘choice’ approach includes the roles of leaders, ideas, or ‘leadership” in political decision-making.

• Understanding Political Outcomes by Examining “Structures”

-This section indicates that the book will look at four categories of structure: economic, cultural, identity, and political-institutional. These are used in chapters 2-8.

• Understanding Political Outcomes by Examining “Choices”

-This section explains this approach in more depth and indicates that it will be emphasized in chapters 9-11 of the book, which entail arguments that assume rational action.

• Structure, Choice, and Levels of Analysis

-This section notes that comparativists who employ the structural approach will generally focus on the state-level of analysis, while those taking the choice approach tend to focus on the individual. This section also provides a warning that structural approaches should not try to explain specific individual’s actions. To do so would invite an ‘ecological fallacy,’ which is defined as “an error in explanation due to the assumption that observations that apply to groups also apply to the individuals who make up the groups.”

6. Conclusion

-This brief section is written directly to the students who will presumably read the book. This serves as both an introduction to students’ courses on Comparative politics, as well as an introduction to the book. Regarding the latter, the main themes of this first chapter are summarized, and subsequent chapters are mentioned in the context of the main themes of structure and choice.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download