Political Science and the Real World
| Module title | Political Science and the Real World |
|---|---|
| Module code | POL3288 |
| Academic year | 2023/4 |
| Credits | 30 |
| Module staff | Professor Jason Reifler (Convenor) |
| Duration: Term | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duration: Weeks | 11 | 11 |
| Number students taking module (anticipated) | 25 |
|---|
Module description
In this module, you will learn about an important development in taking political science (and social science generally) from the “ivory tower” to the real world: field experiments. You will learn about how the power of random assignment to different treatment interventions (or control conditions) can be used at scale to simultaneously assess both social science theories while learning how what works to improve economic development, increase voter turnout, reduce corruption, increase prosocial behaviour, promote online civility, and other topics. Students will be able to help choose what topics are covered later in the term.
Module aims - intentions of the module
Field experiments are studies that use the power of random assignment in real world setting to examine the causal effect of various treatments/interventions outside of a laboratory setting. This module aims to:
- Introduce students to field experiments and how they can help answer important questions of how political science or other social science knowledge can be used to learn about and affect the real world.
- Expose students to ethical debates about the use of field experiments.
- Examine “what works” across a number of important questions and topics, potentially including:
- Spurring economic growth and development, particularly in getting people out of poverty
- Increasing voter turnout and other forms of political participation
- Increasing interpersonal understanding about contentious topics
- Reducing online incivility and abuse
- Reducing political corruption
- Increasing pro-social behaviours
- Promote improved critical thinking to analyse contemporary affairs in the UK and abroad.
- Promote understanding of the definition and use of predictive and causal social science models.
- Improve your ability to critically analyse texts and to communicate effectively.
Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs)
ILO: Module-specific skills
On successfully completing the module you will be able to...
- 1. Demonstrate knowledge of electoral politics processes and institutions, and how these differ across different national contexts
- 2. Appreciate the role of voters, campaigns, candidates, media, and context play in affecting electoral outcomes
ILO: Discipline-specific skills
On successfully completing the module you will be able to...
- 3. Explain in a critical way how institutions and preferences combine to produce outcomes
- 4. Demonstrate understanding of the definition and use of predictive social science models
ILO: Personal and key skills
On successfully completing the module you will be able to...
- 5. demonstrate critical thinking skills, particularly as they relate to evaluating empirical (quantitative) evidence;
- 6. demonstrate the ability to work independently within a limited time frame to complete a specified task
- 7. demonstrate writing skills and/or other presentation skills to facilitate more powerful communication
Syllabus plan
Whilst the module’s precise content may vary from year to year, it is envisaged that the syllabus will cover some or all of the following topics:
- How to measure causal effects of interventions and policy solutions
- The ethics and morality of field experiments that test at scale
- Reading studies that examine interventions designed to address some of the following (specific topics may vary)
- Spurring economic growth and development, particularly in getting people out of poverty
- Increasing voter turnout and other forms of political participation
- Increasing interpersonal understanding about contentious topics
- Reducing online incivility and abuse
- Reducing political corruption
- Increasing pro-social behaviours
- Additional topics as chosen by module students
- Learning how to interpret results from quantitative studies
- How the “fundamentals” (such as economic performance and how long the incumbent party has been in power) help explain election outcomes
- How electoral rules shape electoral outcomes (e.g., “Duverger’s Law” in first past the post single member district system versus proportional representation systems)
- Whether or not campaigns have an effect on election outcomes/the effect of campaign activities on
- Competing theories of voting behaviour
- The role that scandal plays in affecting the electoral prospects of parties and candidates
Learning activities and teaching methods (given in hours of study time)
| Scheduled Learning and Teaching Activities | Guided independent study | Placement / study abroad |
|---|---|---|
| 40 | 260 |
Details of learning activities and teaching methods
| Category | Hours of study time | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Scheduled learning and teaching activity | 40 | 20 X 2-hour seminars |
| Guided independent study | 260 | A variety of private study tasks directed by module leader. These tasks may include: Reading assignments Preparing assessments Following political news events |
Formative assessment
| Form of assessment | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Essay plan | 500 words | 1-7 | Written |
Summative assessment (% of credit)
| Coursework | Written exams | Practical exams |
|---|---|---|
| 56 | 44 | 0 |
Details of summative assessment
| Form of assessment | % of credit | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exam | 44 | 1.75 hours | 1-7 | Written |
| Essay (Research design, field essay, or meta analysis) | 36 | 2250 words | 1-7 | Written |
| Short report | 20 | Students will have choice of either (due at the same time): -1250 words written -12.5-minute presentation (delivered as recorded video, slide deck, or similar) | 1-7 | Written |
Details of re-assessment (where required by referral or deferral)
| Original form of assessment | Form of re-assessment | ILOs re-assessed | Timescale for re-assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exam (1.75 hours) | Exam (1.75 hours) | 1-7 | Referral/Deferral period |
| Essay (2250 words) | Essay (2250 words) | 1-7 | Referral/Deferral period |
| Short report (choice of either 1250 words written OR 12.5-minute presentation - delivered as recorded video, slide deck, or similar) | Short report (choice of either 1250 words written OR 12.5-minute presentation - delivered as recorded video, slide deck, or similar) | 1-7 | Referral/Deferral period |
Re-assessment notes
Deferral – if you miss an assessment for certificated reasons judged acceptable by the Mitigation Committee, you will normally be either deferred in the assessment or an extension may be granted. The mark given for a re-assessment taken as a result of deferral will not be capped and will be treated as it would be if it were your first attempt at the assessment.
Referral – if you have failed the module overall (i.e. a final overall module mark of less than 40%) you will be required to submit a further assessment as necessary. If you are successful on referral, your overall module mark will be capped at 40%.
Indicative learning resources - Basic reading
Practical Guide, Princeton University Press. 2013.
John, Peter. Field Experiments in Political Science and Public Policy: Practical Lessons in Design and Delivery, Routledge, 2017.
Karlan, Dean and Jacob Appel. Failing in the Field, Princeton University Press, 2016.
Gerber, Alan S., and Donald P. Green. Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation. WW Norton, 2012.
Broockman, David E., and Daniel M. Butler. 2017. “The Causal Effects of Elite Position-Taking on Voter Attitudes:
Field Experiments with Elite Communication.” American Journal of Political Science 61.1: 208-221.
Grose, Christian, Pamela Lopez, Sara Sadhwani, and Antoine Yoshinaka. Forthcoming. “Social Lobbying.” Journal of Politics.
Zelizer, Adam. 2019. “Is position-taking contagious? evidence of cue-taking from two field experiments in a state legislature.” American Political Science Review 113.2: 340-352.
Jerit, Jennifer, Jason Barabas, and Scott Clifford. 2013. “Comparing contemporaneous laboratory and field experiments on media effects.” Public Opinion Quarterly 77.1: 256-282.
Gerber, Alan S., Donald P. Green, and Christopher W. Larimer. 2008. “Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment.” American Political Science Review: 33-48.
Foos, Florian, and Eline A. De Rooij. 2017. “All in the family: Partisan disagreement and electoral mobilization in intimate networks—A spillover experiment.” American Journal of Political Science 61.2: 289-304.
Braconnier, CeÌ?line, Jean-Yves Dormagen, and Vincent Pons. 2016. “Voter registration costs and disenfranchisement: experimental evidence from France.” American Political Science Review 111.3: 584-604.
| Credit value | 30 |
|---|---|
| Module ECTS | 15 |
| Module pre-requisites | None |
| Module co-requisites | None |
| NQF level (module) | 6 |
| Available as distance learning? | No |
| Origin date | 31/01/2022 |
| Last revision date | 17/03/2023 |
