FORSKARUTDANNINGSKURS

Research Design and the Use of Experiments in Political Science

5.-8. Juni, 2000

Bergen, Norge

 

 Kursledere:

Professor Richard E. Matland

LOS-Senteret

Universitetet i Bergen

 

Professor Rick K. Wilson

Department of Political Science

Rice University

 

Course Objective:

 

This course has as its primary mission the consideration of experiments in political science.   We are unabashed advocates of methodological pluralism and of the use of experiments.   Through this course we hope to introduce the next  generation of Nordic political scientists to the use of experiments in political science.

 

Among the topics we wish to discuss are the strengths (and weaknesses) of experiments, the role of experiments in a multiple methods arsenal, how experiments are presently being used in different areas in political science, and how one could bring an experimental approach to bear to the study of political science issues students are interested in.  In our discussion of experimental design issues, we will deal with questions of sample selection, the strengths and weaknesses of field research versus laboratory research, the manner in which treatment variables can be introduced, and questions of experimental research ethics.  In addition to questions of how to do experimental research we will also review a variety of fields in political science where experimental research has advanced our knowledge.   Among the specific areas of political science in which experiments have made a noticeable contribution are collective action theory, theories of distributive justice, the effect of institutional rules on policy outcomes, and evaluation of women as political candidates.  We will review each of these.  We will also look at experiments as a source of information on survey bias and how experiments can be used in applied public policy settings.

 

We will set off time for students to be able to discuss possible experiments that they are considering in their own research.  Questions of design, sample selection, reasonable independent and dependent measures will all be raised.  The course has a total of 24 hours of class time and is a 3 credit course for Nordic doctoral students (3 vekttallskurs).  Students desiring to receive full credit for the course are expected to be present for the seminars, actively participate, and write a 15-25 page paper which will be due on October 15th.  The papers may be written in a Scandinavian language or English.  We would urge students to consider writing in English so that after revisions the papers can be sent out to international journals for publication consideration. The course will be taught in English, men kursleder er ganske stø i Norsk, så det vil ikkje by på noko som helst problem å ta opp spørsmål på Norsk.

 

Required Textbooks

 

Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (1993) Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press.

 

Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley  (1963) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research.  Chicago:  Rand McNally College Publishing Co.

 

Daniel Friedman and Shyam Sunder. (1994) Experimental Methods  London: Cambridge University Press.

 

COURSE OUTLINE: REQUIRED READINGS

 

Note:  All readings on this syllabus are "required".  We have starred (**) one reading in each section as the reading deserving the most care in reading.  There is a Recommended Reading List attached.  The readings on the Recommended Reading list are supplemental and are only for those who have an interest in greater reading in a specific area.  We may, however, ask each participant to choose one of the recommended readings from the list and present to the class.

 

MONDAY

 

10:00-12 am  Introduction to Course.

 

OBJECTIVES:  Introduce ourselves and the course.  Discuss the variety of experiments used in the social sciences.  The range includes examples taken from rational choice to social psychology to attitude formation in developing survey instruments to applied field experiments.  Have students participate in a series of experiments.

 

**Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey  "On behalf of an experimental political science."  In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 1-39.

 

 

1:00-3:00 pm      Basics of Experiments and Multiple Methods

 

OBJECTIVES:  What is the goal of social science?  We argue it is the ability to specify causal relationships.  The importance of multiple methods to reaching that goal will be discussed.  Time will be spent discussing the concept of causality.  Special emphasis will be laid on the essential elements in experimental  design: randomization and unobtrusive measures.

 

**Friedman and Sunder, 1994.  Experimental Methods.  pp. 1-37.

 

Campbell and Stanley. 1963.  Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research.  pp. 1-34.

 

3:00 - 5:00 pm Collective Action

 

OBJECTIVES:  Introduce students to the problem of collective action.  Common Pool Goods and Public Goods dilemmas will be discussed.  Some initial experimental results will be presented.  We will discuss predictions of how a Nordic population might react if placed in similar experiments. We will start designing our own collective action experiment within a Nordic context.  We will urge students to start thinking about how to design an experiment that might tie in with their own interests.

 

**Elinor Ostrom  1990.  Governing the Commons:  The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,  Chapter 1 "Reflections on the Commons", pp. 1-28.

 

Ostrom, V. and  E. Ostrom. 1977.  "Public Goods and Public Choices," Pp. 7-49 in Alternatives for Delivering Public Services:  Toward Improved Performance.  (E. S. Savas, ed.)  Westview Press.

 

Palfrey, Thomas R.  1993.  "The Conflict Between Private Interests and the Common Good."  In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 211-219.

 

TUESDAY

 

10:00-12:00 Experimental Research Design:  Internal Validity Considerations.

 

OBJECTIVES:  We shall discuss how internal validity concerns relate to experimental design.  While experiments have a big advantage over other forms of research in terms of internal validity, there are still a set of internal validity concerns that must be faced when developing experiments.

 

**Friedman and Sunder, 1994.  Experimental Methods.  pp. 38-73.

 

Messick, D. M. and C. G. McClintock.  1968.  "Motivational Bases of Choice in Experimental Games."  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology  4:1-25.

 

Komorita, S. S. and J. M. Barth.  1985.  "Components of Reward in Social Dilemmas."  Journal of Personality and Social  Psychology  48:364-373.

 

1:00 - 3:00 pm   Collective Action -- Operational Design Considerations

 

OBJECTIVES: In this section we want students to seriously think about how to operationalize their question.  What are the appropriate variables?  What controls might we want to introduce?  How will we operationalize and manipulate our key INDEPENDENT VARIABLE?

 

**Isaac, R. Mark, James M. Walker, and Susan H. Thomas.  "Divergent Evidence on Free Riding:  An Experimental Examination of Possible Explanations."   In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 265-302.

 

Dawes, Robyn M., John M. Orbell, Randy T. Simmons, and Alphons J. C. van de Kragt.  "Organizing Groups for Collective Action."    In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 245-263.

 

van Dijk, Eric and Henk Wilke.  (1995)  "Coordination Rules in Asymmetric Social Dilemmas:  A Comparison between Public Good Dilemmas and Resource Dilemmas."  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology  31: 1-27.

 

3:00 - 5:00 pm  Case Studies: Experimental Studies of Distributive Justice

 

OBJECTIVES:  This section should force students to think about the importance of specifying a theoretical set of linkages.  We will emphasize the ways in which these papers take a "big" idea and then step back to test out specific linkages.  Emphasis will be placed on identifying how broader theories of distributive justice are operationalized into an experimental context.

 

**Richard E. Matland, John T. Scott,  Toril Aalberg, Brian Bornstein,  Philip A. Michelbach and Ola

 Listhaug. (1999) An Experimental Study of Distributive Justice Norms Across Cultures.

 

Norman Frohlich and Joe A. Oppenheimer. (1990)  Choosing Justice in Experimental Democracies with Production  American Political Science Review 84(2): 461-477.

 

Mitchell, George, Philip E. Tetlock, Barbara A. Mellers, and Lisa Ordunez.  1993.  “Judgments of Social Justice: Compromises Between Equality and Efficiency”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65: 629-639.

 

WEDNESDAY

 

9:30-11:00  Experimental Research Design:  Design Issues and Ethics

 

OBJECTIVES:  To clearly enunciate the ethical code that experimental researchers must adhere to.  Clearly stipulate what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior by a researcher.  Where the limits go and why they are placed there. Discuss the possible ethical dilemmas involved in our collective action experiment.

 

**Milgram, Stanley  1974.  Obedience to Authority:  An Experimental View.  New York:  Harper and Row, Chapters 1-2 and Appendix I (pp. 1-26; 193-202).

 

Friedman and Sunder, 1994.  Experimental Methods:  A Primer for Economists.  pp. 74-109.

 

Cooper, Joel.  1976.  "Deception and Role Playing:  On Telling the Good Guys from the Bad Guys."  American Psychologist  31: 605-610.

 

Bonetti, Shane. 1998. "Experimental Economics and Deception." Journal of Economic Psychology 19(3): 377-95.

11:00 – 12:30 pm Collective Action Choices -- Construct Validity, the case of Communication

 

OBJECTIVES:  In this section we want students to think more about operationalization.  Discuss threats to construct validity.  We will spend a great deal of time thinking about how to create and measure theoretical constructs within the context of an experiment. 

 

**Wilson, Rick K. and Jane Sell. 1997. “‘Liar, Liar ...’ Cheap Talk and Reputation in Repeated Public Goods Settings.”  Journal of Conflict Resolution 41 (5): 695-717.

 

Orbell, John M., Alphons J. C. van de Kragt, and Robyn M. Dawes.  1988.  “Explaining Discussion-Induced Cooperation”  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology  54: 811-819.

 

Ostrom, E., J. M. Walker, and R. Gardner.  1992.  "Covenants with and without a sword:  Self-governance is possible."  American Political Science Review  86: 404-417.

 

1:30 - 3:15 pm   Case Studies:  Experimental Evidence on Candidate Evaluation and Bias in Survey Research Instruments

 

OBJECTIVES:  This section provides a series of studies that use experiments to look at questions either in survey applications or questions of how women are evaluated as candidates.  We will emphasize the unobtrusive nature of experiments that allow us to tap information that would be impossible to get at otherwise.

 

**Richard E. Matland (1995) "Kjønnstereotype forestillinger om politikere: en

eksperimentell studie av likestillingen i Norge." i Kjønn og Politikk ed. Nina Raaum.

 

D. King and R. Matland (1999).  Partisanship and the Impact of Candidate Gender in

 Congressional Elections: Results of an Experiment”.  (manuscript, R&R at JOP)

 

Howard Schuman and Lawrence Bobo. "Survey Based Experiments on White Racial Attitudes toward Residential Integration."   In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 53-78

 

Sullivan, John L., James Pierson and George E. Marcus.  "Ideological Constraint in the Mass Public:  A Methodological Critique and Some New Findings."    In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 79-96.

 

3:15 – 5:00 Case Studies: Experimental Evidence on the Effect of Political Institutions

OBJECTIVES: This section provides a series of cases which use experiments to look at questions of the effects of political institutions. We emphasize the control experiments provide so that the relevant factors can be carefully studied and analyzed.

 

**Fiorina, Morris P. and Charles R. Plott.  "Committee Decisions under Majority Rule:  An Experimental Study."    In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 399-433.

 

Palfrey, Thomas R.  "Agendas and Decisions in Government."    In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp.389-397.

 

THURSDAY

 

10:00 - 12:00 am  Experimental Research Design:  External Validity

 

Objectives:  This section will talk about the use of field experiments and the tradeoffs between impact and control.  Guidance on how to adapt experiments to external environments will be emphasized.

 

**Campbell and Stanley. 1963.  Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research.  pp. 34-71.

 

1:00-3:00 pm  Case Studies:  Applying The Experimental Method to Public Policy Questions.

 

OBJECTIVES: This section provides a series of cases which use experiments to look at questions of public policy. We will emphasize the relevance of experiments in solving applied public policy questions. 

 

**Weiss,  Janet A. "Coping with Complexity:  An Experimental Study of Public Policy Decision-Making."  In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 185-208.

 

Dyer, J. S.  and R. E. Miles.  1976.  "An Actual Application of Collective Choice Theory to the Selection of Trajectories for the Mariner Jupiter/Saturn 1977 Project."  Operations Research  24:  220-44.

 

Iyengar, Shanto, Mark D. Peters, and Donald R. Kinder.  "Experimental Demonstrations of the 'Not-So-Minimal' Consequences of Television News Programs."  In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political Science University of Michigan Press, pp.  313-331.

 

3:00-5:00 pm  Collective Action -- Laboratory Procedures

 

OBJECTIVES: In this segment we will spend time talking about procedures for conducting an experiment.  Hopefully by this point we'll have a paper/pencil design that we can run.  We will go through the steps of running such an experiment and if possible will run the experiment on a sample of available subjects.

 


RECOMMENDED READINGS

 

Listed below are the recommended readings for each section.  These readings supplement and fill out the required readings.  We may ask students to read ONE of the articles listed on this recommended readings list and report on it in class.

 

COURSE OUTLINE

 

MONDAY

 

10:00-12 am  Introduction to Course

 

1:00-3:00 pm  Basics of Experiments and Multiple Methods

 

Kaplan, Abraham. 1964.  The Conduct of Inquiry:  Methodology for Behavioral Science.  San Francisco:  Chandler Publishing Co.  Chapter 4 (Experiment), pp. 126-170.

 

Plott, C. R.  1979.  "The Application of Laboratory Experimental Methods to Public Choice."  In Collective Decision Making:  Applications from Public Choice Theory  Clifford Russell (ed.).  Washington, D.C.:  Resources for the Future, pp. 137-160.

 

King, Gary, Robert Keohane, and Sidney Verba. 1994.  Designing Social Inquiry:  Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research.  Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 75-114.

 

Roth, Alvin E. 1994. "Lets Keep the Con out of Experimental Econ.: A Methodological Note." Empirical Economics 19(2): 279-89.

 

3:00 - 5:00 pm  Collective Action

 

Hardin, Garrett  1968.  "The Tragedy of the Commons"  Science 162:1243-1248.

 

Olsen, Mancur 1965.  The Logic of Collective Action.   Cambridge, MA:  Harvard University             Press.

 

Parks, Craig D. and Anh D. Vu.  1994.  "Social Dilemma Behavior of Individuals from Highly Individualist and Collectivist Cultures."  Journal of Conflict Resolution.  38: 708-718.

 

TUESDAY

 

10:00-12:00 Experimental Research Design:  Internal Validity Considerations.

 

Smith, Vernon.  1982.  "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science" American Economic Review  72:  923-955.

 

Marwell , G. and R. E. Ames.  1979.  "Experiments on the Provision of Public Goods, I:  Resources, Interest, Group Size and the Free-Rider Problem."  American Journal of Sociology  84:1335-1360.

1:00 - 3:00 pm   Collective Action -- Operational Design Considerations

 

Ledyard, John.  1995.  "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research."  In John H.

             Kagel            and Alvin Roth (eds.)  The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton,

             NJ: Princeton University Press.  pp. 111-194.

 

Messick, David M. and Marilyn B. Brewer.  1983.  "Solving Social Dilemmas:  A Review."  Review of Personality and Social Psychology  4:11-44.

 

Dawes, R. M. 1980.  "Social Dilemmas."  Annual Review of Psychology .  31: 169-193.

 

3:00 - 5:00 pm  Case Studies: Experimental Studies of Distributive Justice

 

Norman Frohlich and Joe A. Oppenheimer. (1994)  Choosing Justice:  An Experimental Approach to Ethical Theory  Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

 

Norman Frohlich,  Joe A. Oppenheimer, and Cheryl Eavey  (1987) " Choices of Principles of Distributive Justice in Experimental Groups"  American Journal of Political Science  31(3): 606-636.

 

Kjell Törnblom (1992) “The Social Psychology of Distributive Justice,” in Justice:

 Interdisciplinary Perspectives, ed. Klaus R. Scherer (pp. 177-236).

 

Kjell Törnblom and Uriel G. Foa (1983) “Choice of a Distribution Principle: Crosscultural

Evidence on the Effects of Resources,” Acta Sociologica 26:161-173

 

Virginia Murphy-Berman and John J. Berman (1984) “Factors Affecting Allocation to Needy

and Meritorious Recipients: A Cross-Cultural Comparison.”  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46(6):1267-1272.

 

Lissowski, Grzegorz and Piotr Swistak (1995) "Choosing the Best Social Order:  New Principles of Justice and Normative Dimensions of Choice".  American Political  Science Review  89(1):74-98.

 

WEDNESDAY:

 

9:30-11:00  Experimental Research Design:  Design Issues and Ethics

 

American Psychological Association.  2000. “Ethical prinipcles of psychologists and code of conduct.”  Section 6, Teaching, Training Supervision, Research and Publishing.

 

Forward, John, Rachelle Canter and Ned Kirsch.  1976.  "Role-Enactment and Deception Methodologies."  American Psychologist  31: 595-604.

 

Farr, James L. and W. Burleigh Seaver.  1975.  "Stress and Discomfort in Psychological Research:  Subject Perceptions of Experimental Procedures."  American Psychologist  30: 770-773.

 

 

11:00 – 12:30 pm  Collective Action Choices -- Construct Validity, the case of Communication

 

Kerr, Norbert L. and Cynthia M. Kaufman-Gilliland. 1994.  “Communication, Commitment and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas”  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology  66: 513-529.

 

Sell, Jane, W. I. Griffith and Rick K. Wilson.  1993. "Are Women More Cooperative than Men in Social Dilemmas?  Evidence from Two Experiments."  Social Psychology Quarterly,  (September 1993) V. 56: 211-222.

 

1:30 - 3:15 pm   Case Studies:  Experimental Evidence on Candidate Evaluation and Bias in Survey Research Instruments

 

Zaller, John (1992).  The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion.  Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press.  Chapter 5, pp. 76-96.

 

Seth Thompson and Janie Steckenrider (1997)  “The Relative Irrelevance of Candidate Sex”

            Woman and Politics 17(4): 71-92.

 

Virginia Sapiro (1982) "If U.S. Senator Baker Were a Woman:  An Experimental Study of Candidate Images"  Political Psychology  2:61-83.

 

Lee Sigelman and Carol K. Sigelman (1982) "Sexism, Racism, and Ageism in Voting Behavior: An Experimental Analysis"  Social Psychology Quarterly  45: 263-269.

 

R. Matland (1994)   "Putting Scandinavian Equality to the Test:  An Experimental Evaluation

             of Gender Stereotyping of Political Candidates in a Sample of Norwegian Voters".

             British Journal of Political Science  24: 273-292.

 

Laurie E. Ekstrand and William A. Eckert (1981) "The Impact of Candidate's Sex on Voter Choice” Western Political Quarterly 34:78-87.

 

3:15 – 5:00  Experimental Evidence on the Effect of Political Institutions

 

Levine, Michael E. and Charles R. Plott.  "Agenda Influence and Its Implications."   In Donald R. Kinder and Thomas R. Palfrey (eds.)  Experimental Foundations of Political  Science University of Michigan Press, pp. 461-496.

 

Wilson, R. K.  1986.  "Forward and Backward Agenda Procedures: Committee Experiments on Structurally Induced Equilibrium." ­Journal of Politics­  48: 390-409.

 

Haney, Patrick, Roberta Herzberg and Rick K. Wilson.  1992.  "Advice and Consent:  Unitary Actors, Advisory Models and Experimental Tests."  Journal of Conflict Resolution   36:603-633.

 

 

 

 

THURSDAY

 

10:00 - 12:00 am  Experimental Research Design:  External Validity

 

Ellsworth, Phoebe (1977) "From Abstract Ideas to Concrete Instances:  Some Guidelines for Choosing Natural Research Settings.  American Psychologist 32:604-615.

 

Erev, Ido, Gary Bornstein and Rachely Galili.  1993.  "Constructive Intergroup Competition as a Solution to the Free Rider Problem:  A Field Experiment."  Journal of Experimental Social Psychology  29: 463-478.

 

Greenber, David H.  and Philip K. Robins 1986.  "The Changing Role of Social Experiments in Policy Analysis, "  Journal of Policy Analysis and Management Vol. 5(2): 340-362.

 

1:00-3:00 pm  Applying The Experimental Method to Public Policy Questions.

 

W. Steven Barnett (1985)  Benefit/Cost Analysis of the Perry Preschool Program and its Policy Implications".  Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 7(4): 333-342.

 

Wesley A. Magat, John W. Payne, and Peter F. Brucatio (1986)  "How Important is Information Format?  An Experimental Study of Home Energy Audit Programs"  Journal of Policy Analysis and Management Vol. 6(1): 20-34.

 

 

3:00-5:00 pm  Collective Action -- Laboratory Procedures