The Evolution of Methodological Approaches in the Canadian Journal of Political Science (original) (raw)
Related papers
Canadian Journal of Political Science, 2021
Canadian political science has changed over the past 50 years; however, these changes have come slowly and lag behind larger societal demographic transformations. While early attention to diversity concentrated on the place of women within the discipline, more recent attention focuses on the presence of Black, Indigenous and other political scientists of colour. Accompanying a diversification of personnel has been a broadening of the substantive focus of our research, as well as an expansion in the epistemological and methodological approaches applied to the study of politics. Yet despite these adaptations, the study of political science in Canada remains siloed and often exclusionary, challenging our ability to train the next generation of scholars to be capable of addressing the issues facing a world that is increasingly complex and diverse.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013
This paper contributes to the understanding of analytical practices and tools employed by policy analysts involved in policy formulation and appraisal by examining data drawn from 15 surveys of federal, provincial and territorial government policy analysts in Canada conducted in 2009-2010, two surveys of NGO analysts conducted in 2010-2011 and two surveys of external policy consultants conducted in 2012-2013. Data from these surveys allow the exploration of several facets of the use of analytical tools ranging from more precise description of the frequency of use of specific kinds of tools and techniques in government as well as their distribution between permanent government officials and external policy analysts. As the paper shows, the frequency of use of major types of analytical techniques used in policy formulation is not the same between the three types of actors and also varies within government by Department and issue type. Nevertheless some general patterns in the use of policy appraisal tools in government can be discerned, with all groups employing processrelated tools more frequently than 'substantive' tools related to the technical analysis of policy proposals. Policy Analysts Policy Consultants NGOs 1 Political Science Economics General Social Sciences 2 Business Management Business Management Business Management 3 Economics Engineering Arts and Humanities 4 Public Administration Political Science Political Science 5 Sociology Public Administration Public Administration More important that disciplinary background, however, for our purposes, is training in specific subjects such as policy analysis. About 40% of policy consultants (42.7%) and about the same number of policy analysts in government (36.7%) had
A Sea Change in Political Methodology
Shifting debates on what constitutes " science " reveal competing claims about methodology. 2 Of course, in its origin the term " science " means " knowledge, " and researchers obviously hold a wide spectrum of positions on how to produce viable knowledge. Within this spectrum, we compare two alternative meanings of science, advanced by scholars who seek to legitimate sharply contrasting views of qualitative methods. This comparison points to a sea change in political science methodology. 3 1 This article draws on the Introductions to Parts I and II of Brady and Collier, Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, 2nd edn. (Lanham, MD.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010). 2 Morgan (1996) provides a broad overview of rival views of science, encompassing the natural, biological, and social sciences. 3 For our own work, we share David Freedman's (2010a) view of plurality in scientific methods, and we also recognize social versus natural science as partially different enterprises. Yet the two can and should strive for careful formulation of hypotheses, intersubjective agreement on the facts being analyzed, precise use of data, and good
Canadian Public Policy, 2014
Abstract: Les entrevues en profondeur avec des représentants du gouvernement sont un élément de recherche essentiel lors de l’étude d’un gouvernement. Les facteurs historiques et institutionnels, et en particulier la dynamique interne informelle qui influence les politiques, exigent une très bonne compréhension, en général mieux concrétisée grâce à ces méthodes d’entrevue. Au Canada, de nombreuses tendances au sein de l’administration fédérale portent visiblement sur la réglementation et la centralisation croissante des renseignements du gouvernement. On a noté de l’ingérence politique dans les demandes d’accès à l’information; on a supprimé les résultats de la recherche scientifique; et l’accès des médias aux politiciens est devenu très contraignant. Nous nous sommes donc demandé si le resserrement des contrôles portant sur les renseignements avait aussi eu un effet sur les entrevues de recherche auprès des représentants du gouvernement. Le présent article explore cette question lors d’entrevues avec des universitaires et des fonctionnaires du gouvernement fédéral du Canada. Nous cherchons à savoir s’il y a eu resserrement de l’accès aux entrevues de recherche auprès du gouvernement et, le cas échéant, s’il y a un effet sur la façon et la nature de notre recherche. Abstract: In-depth interviews with government officials are a critical research method for the study of government. Historical and institutional factors, and particularly the informal internal dynamics that influence policy, require a depth of understanding that is often best investigated through such interview methods. At the federal level in Canada we see many trends that point to the increasing centralization and control of government information. There has been political interference in Access to Information Requests; the outcomes of scientific research have been suppressed; and media access to politicians has become highly constrained. This led us to ask whether tightening controls on information have also affected access to research interviews with government officials. This paper explores this issue by interviewing both academics and public servants in the Canadian federal government. We ask is there evidence of a tightening grip on access to governmental research interviews and, if so, is this affecting how and what we research?
Planning for the Future: Methodology Training in Canadian Universities
Recent changes in government policy making and the labour market have created new opportunities for political scientists, provided that we have the skills to respond to them. We argue that changes need to be made in the area of methodology training in order to capitalize on these opportunities. Canadian political scientists should ensure that all our students acquire basic quantitative competencies, in addition to research design and qualitative analysis training, and that those graduate students interested in more sophisticated quantitative methods have the opportunity to develop those skills. We explain how expanding and deepening training in quantitative methods is one strategy for ensuring a role for political science in evidence-based policy making, for expanding labour market options for students, and for keeping apace with disciplinary trends. We caution, however, that special care needs to be taken to ensure that all political scientists have equal opportunities to develop such skills.
The optimization of the development of quantitative instruments is a key concern in any social science endeavour. Whilst instrument development has been for many years restricted to mono-method approaches, a new era has come that combines qualitative techniques to enhance the development of quantitative instruments. This approach constitutes one of the main rationales of conducting mixed method studies which in political science research, in contrast to the adjacent social science disciplines, has been scarcely applied. The paper's rationale is two-fold; a) to review the three-phase exploratory design for the optimization of the development of quantitative instruments via qualitative techniques and b) to present the main benefits and challenges of the approach for political science research. Instrument development via qualitative techniques applies an inductive-deductive and an emic-etic perspective that increases construct-related validity in cross-sectional political science studies and eliminates construct bias in cross-national and cross-cultural ones. The paper's main thesis is that the mixed method approach is not the panacea of all research inquiries. However, the optimization of quantitative instrument development via qualitative techniques may adequately serve mixed method's fundamental principal, i.e., maximizing the potency and minimizing the weaknesses derived from the amalgamation of the two methods to enhance the validity of political studies' conclusions.
A qualitative method refers to the way of studying the social and political world that seeks to understand the meaning underlying an intention, action, object or phenomenon. In Political Science research, qualitative methods are usually contrasted with quantitative methods, which typically deal with large amount of data, using surveys and statistical methods, with the aim of establishing causal relationships between social phenomena. Given such differences, qualitative and quantitative methods have usually been conceived as two mutually exclusive modes of generating and analysing data. In this chapter, we challenge these assumptions, but argue that the most important distinction between different methods of analyses relates to the ontological and epistemological position they rely on, rather than the type of data they seek to analysis. We also outline examples of the use of qualitative methods in Political Science research to show that such methods cannot be associated with an 'anything goes approach'
What Does it Take for a Canadian Political Scientist to be Cited
Social Science Quarterly, 2008
Objectives. The article examines the factors that influence the frequency whereby scholarly articles published by Canadian political scientists are cited.Method. We collected data on 1,860 journal articles published between 1985 and 2005 by 758 Canadian political scientists and listed in the Social Science Citation Index. Using these data, we performed OLS and tobit estimations to identify factors influencing citation frequency.Results. The regressions show that the reputation of the journal in which the article is published, though important, does not explain everything. The gender of the author(s), the number of authors, the geographical focus of the article, the field, and the methodology also matter.Conclusion. An article is more likely to be widely cited if it is published in a prestigious journal, if it is written by several authors, if it applies quantitative methods, if it compares countries, and if it deals with administration and public policy or elections and political parties. Faculty members who belong to larger departments and those who are women are more cited.