Political Science

What this handout is about

This handout will help you to recognize and to go after writing standards in political science. The very first step toward accomplishing this aim is to develop a basic understanding of political science and the kind of work political scientists do.

Defining politics and political science

Political scientist Harold Laswell said it best: at its most basic level, politics is the fight of «who gets what, when, how.» This fight may be as modest as challenging interest groups fighting over control of a puny municipal budget or as tremendous as a military stand-off inbetween international superpowers. Political scientists examine such fights, both petite and large, in an effort to develop general principles or theories about the way the world of politics works. Think about the title of your course or re-read the course description in your syllabus. You’ll find that your course covers a particular sector of the large world of «politics» and brings with it a set of topics, issues, and approaches to information that may be helpful to consider as you begin a writing assignment. The diverse structure of political science reflects the diverse kinds of problems the discipline attempts to analyze and explain. In fact, political science includes at least eight major sub-fields:

  • American politics examines political behavior and institutions in the United States.
  • Comparative politics analyzes and compares political systems within and across different geographic regions.
  • International relations investigates relations among nation states and the activities of international organizations such as the United Nations, the World Bank, and NATO, as well as international actors such as terrorists, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and multi-national corporations (MNCs).
  • Political theory analyzes fundamental political concepts such as power and democracy and foundational questions, like «How should the individual and the state relate?»
  • Political methodology deals with the ways that political scientists ask and investigate questions.
  • Public policy examines the process by which governments make public decisions.
  • Public administration studies the ways that government policies are implemented.
  • Public law concentrates on the role of law and courts in the political process.

What is scientific about political science?

Investigating relationships

Albeit political scientists are prone to debate and disagreement, the majority view the discipline as a genuine science. As a result, political scientists generally strive to emulate the objectivity as well as the conceptual and methodological rigor typically associated with the so-called «hard» sciences (e.g. biology, chemistry, and physics). They see themselves as engaged in exposing the relationships underlying political events and conditions. Based on these revelations, they attempt to state general principles about the way the world of politics works. Given these aims, it is significant for political scientists’ writing to be conceptually precise, free from bias, and well-substantiated by empirical evidence. Knowing that political scientists value objectivity may help you in making decisions about how to write your paper and what to put in it.

Political theory is an significant exception to this empirical treatment. You can learn more about writing for political theory classes in the section «Writing in Political Theory» below.

Building theories

Since theory-building serves as the cornerstone of the discipline, it may be useful to see how it works. You may be wrestling with theories or proposing your own as you write your paper. Consider how political scientists have arrived at the theories you are reading and discussing in your course. Most political scientists adhere to a ordinary model of scientific inquiry when building theories. The key to building precise and persuasive theories is to develop and test hypotheses. Hypotheses are statements that researchers construct for the purpose of testing whether or not a certain relationship exists inbetween two phenomena. To see how political scientists use hypotheses, and to imagine how you might use a hypothesis to develop a thesis for your paper, consider the following example. Suppose that we want to know whether presidential elections are affected by economic conditions. We could formulate this question into the following hypothesis: «When the national unemployment rate is greater than 7 percent at the time of the election, presidential incumbents are not reelected.»

Collecting data

In the research model designed to test this hypothesis, the dependent variable (the phenomenon that is affected by other variables) would be the reelection of incumbent presidents; the independent variable (the phenomenon that may have some effect on the dependent variable) would be the national unemployment rate. You could test the relationship inbetween the independent and dependent variables by collecting data on unemployment rates and the reelection of incumbent presidents and comparing the two sets of information. If you found that in every example that the national unemployment rate was greater than 7 percent at the time of a presidential election the incumbent lost, you would have significant support for our hypothesis.

However, research in political science seldom yields instantly conclusive results. In this case, for example, albeit in most latest presidential elections our hypothesis holds true, President Franklin Roosevelt was reelected in 1936 despite the fact that the national unemployment rate was 17%. To explain this significant exception and to make certain that other factors besides high unemployment rates were not primarily responsible for the defeat of incumbent presidents in other election years, you would need to do further research. So you can see how political scientists use the scientific method to build ever more precise and persuasive theories and how you might begin to think about the topics that interest you as you write your paper.

Clear, consistent, objective writing

Since political scientists construct and assess theories in accordance with the principles of the scientific method, writing in the field conveys the rigor, objectivity, and logical consistency that characterize this method. Thus political scientists avoid the use of impressionistic or metaphorical language, or language which appeals primarily to our senses, emotions, or moral beliefs. In other words, rather than persuade you with the elegance of their prose or the moral virtue of their beliefs, political scientists persuade through their instruction of the facts and their capability to relate those facts to theories that can withstand the test of empirical investigation. In writing of this sort, clarity and concision are at a premium. To achieve such clarity and concision, political scientists precisely define any terms or concepts that are significant to the arguments that they make. This precision often requires that they «operationalize» key terms or concepts. «Operationalizing» simply means that important—but possibly vague or abstract—concepts like «justice» are defined in ways that permit them to be measured or tested through scientific investigation.

Fortunately, you will generally not be expected to devise or operationalize key concepts entirely on your own. In most cases, your professor or the authors of assigned readings will already have defined and/or operationalized concepts that are significant to your research. And in the event that someone hasn’t already come up with precisely the definition you need, other political scientists will in all likelihood have written enough on the topic that you’re investigating to give you some clear guidance on how to proceed. For this reason, it is always a good idea to explore what research has already been done on your topic before you begin to construct your own argument. (See our handout on making an academic argument .)

Example of an operationalized term

To give you an example of the kind of «rigor» and «objectivity» political scientists aim for in their writing, let’s examine how someone might operationalize a term. Reading through this example should clarify the level of analysis and precision that you will be expected to employ in your writing. Here’s how you might define key concepts in a way that permits us to measure them.

We are all familiar with the term «democracy.» If you were asked to define this term, you might make a statement like the following: «Democracy is government by the people.» You would, of course, be correct—democracy is government by the people. But, in order to evaluate whether or not a particular government is fully democratic or is more or less democratic when compared with other governments, we would need to have more precise criteria with which to measure or assess democracy. Most political scientists agree that these criteria should include the following rights and freedoms for citizens:

  1. Freedom to form and join organizations
  2. Freedom of expression
  3. Right to vote
  4. Eligibility for public office
  5. Right of political leaders to contest for support
  6. Right of political leaders to challenge for votes
  7. Alternative sources of information
  8. Free and fair elections
  9. Institutions for making government policies depend on votes and other expressions of preference

By adopting these nine criteria, we now have a definition that will permit us to measure democracy. Thus, if you want to determine whether Brazil is more democratic than Sweden, you can evaluate each country in terms of the degree to which it fulfills the above criteria.

What counts as good writing in political science?

While rigor, clarity, and concision will be valued in any chunk of writing in political science, knowing the kind of writing task you’ve been assigned will help you to write a good paper. Two of the most common kinds of writing assignments in political science are the research paper and the theory paper.

Writing political science research papers

Your instructors use research paper assignments as a means of assessing your capability to understand a elaborate problem in the field, to develop a perspective on this problem, and to make a persuasive argument in favor of your perspective. In order for you to successfully meet this challenge, your research paper should include the following components: (1) an introduction, (Two) a problem statement, (Three) a discussion of methodology, (Four) a literature review, (Five) a description and evaluation of your research findings, and (6) a summary of your findings. Here’s a brief description of each component.

In the introduction of your research paper, you need to give the reader some basic background information on your topic that suggests why the question you are investigating is interesting and significant. You will also need to provide the reader with a statement of the research problem you are attempting to address and a basic outline of your paper as a entire. The problem statement presents not only the general research problem you will address but also the hypotheses that you will consider. In the methodology section, you will explain to the reader the research methods you used to investigate your research topic and to test the hypotheses that you have formulated. For example, did you conduct interviews, use statistical analysis, rely upon previous research studies, or some combination of all of these methodological approaches?

Before you can develop each of the above components of your research paper, you will need to conduct a literature review. A literature review involves reading and analyzing what other researchers have written on your topic before going on to do research of your own. There are some very pragmatic reasons for doing this work. Very first, as insightful as your ideas may be, someone else may have had similar ideas and have already done research to test them. By reading what they have written on your topic, you can ensure that you don’t repeat, but rather learn from, work that has already been done. 2nd, to demonstrate the soundness of your hypotheses and methodology, you will need to indicate how you have borrowed from and/or improved upon the ideas of others.

By referring to what other researchers have found on your topic, you will have established a framework of reference that enables the reader to understand the utter significance of your research results. Thus, once you have conducted your literature review, you will be in a position to present your research findings. In presenting these findings, you will need to refer back to your original hypotheses and explain the manner and degree to which your results fit with what you anticipated you would find. If you see strong support for your argument or perhaps some unexpected results that your original hypotheses cannot account for, this section is the place to convey such significant information to your reader. This is also the place to suggest further lines of research that will help refine, clarify inconsistencies with, or provide extra support for your hypotheses. Eventually, in the summary section of your paper, reiterate the significance of your research and your research findings and speculate upon the path that future research efforts should take.

Writing in political theory

Political theory differs from other subfields in political science in that it deals primarily with historical and normative, rather than empirical, analysis. In other words, political theorists are less worried with the scientific measurement of political phenomena than with understanding how significant political ideas develop over time. And they are less worried with evaluating how things are than in debating how they should be. A come back to our democracy example will make these distinctions clearer and give you some clues about how to write well in political theory.

Earlier, we talked about how to define democracy empirically so that it can be measured and tested in accordance with scientific principles. Political theorists also define democracy, but they use a different standard of measurement. Their definitions of democracy reflect their interest in political ideals—for example, liberty, equality, and citizenship—rather than scientific measurement. So, when writing about democracy from the perspective of a political theorist, you may be asked to make an argument about the decent way to define citizenship in a democratic society. Should citizens of a democratic society be expected to engage in decision-making and administration of government, or should they be pleased with casting votes every duo of years?

In order to substantiate your position on such questions, you will need to pay special attention to two interrelated components of your writing: (1) the logical consistency of your ideas and (Two) the manner in which you use the arguments of other theorists to support your own. Very first, you need to make sure that your conclusion and all points leading up to it go after from your original premises or assumptions. If, for example, you argue that democracy is a system of government through which citizens develop their total capacities as human beings, then your notion of citizenship will somehow need to support this broad definition of democracy. A narrow view of citizenship based exclusively or primarily on voting very likely will not do. Whatever you argue, however, you will need to be sure to demonstrate in your analysis that you have considered the arguments of other theorists who have written about these issues. In some cases, their arguments will provide support for your own; in others, they will raise criticisms and concerns that you will need to address if you are going to make a coaxing case for your point of view.

Drafting your paper

If you have used material from outside sources in your paper, be sure to cite them appropriately in your paper. In political science, writers most often use the APA or Turabian (a version of the Chicago Manual of Style) style guides when formatting references. Check with your instructor if he or she has not specified a citation style in the assignment. For more information on constructing citations, see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial.

Conclusion

Albeit all assignments are different, the preceding outlines provide a clear and elementary guide that should help you in writing papers in any sub-field of political science. If you find that you need more assistance than this brief guide provides, refer to the list of extra resources below or make an appointment to see a tutor at the Writing Center.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing the original version of this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find the latest publications on this topic. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial.

Becker, Howard S. 1986. Writing for Social Scientists: How to Begin and Finish Your Thesis, Book, or Article. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Cuba, Lee. 2002. A Brief Guide to Writing about Social Science, Fourth Edition. Fresh York: Longman.

Lasswell, Harold Dwight. 1936. Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. Fresh York, London: Whittlesey House, McGraw-Hill Book Company, inc.

Scott, Gregory M. and Stephen M. Garrison. 1998. The Political Science Student Writer’s Manual, 2nd Edition. Upper Saddle Sea, Fresh Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Turabian, Kate L. 1996. A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, Sixth Edition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Two.Five License .
You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout (just click print) and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

If you love using our handouts, we appreciate contributions of acknowledgement.

The Writing Center • Campus Box #5137 • SASB North Suite 0127 • UNC-CH • Chapel Hill, NC 27599 • CSSAC Home
phone: (919) 962-7710 • email: writing_center@unc.edu
IF IT’S TIME-SENSITIVE, DON’T EMAIL. CALL US!
© 2010-2014 by The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill.
Coach login

Related video: How To Set Up A Rabbit Run


admin_en | 1@1.com

Related Posts

Dr

Jo Roislien is a famous international science communicator who reaches a broad audience by appearing regularly on radio, television, and the printed press. He produces lectures on the communication of sophisticated topics, skill dissemination, and his own research. He has hosted programs such as the mathematics and statistics series Siffer on Norway’s largest national broadcaster NRK 1 […]

In abstract, you should give an overall view of the paper including the importance and necessity of the paper topic (the very first line of the abstract), the previous works and difficulties on this topic( 2nd and third lines), the big picture of your novelty in this paper (fourth and fifth lines), and verifying your […]

Critical thinking is a lot more than merely following a format for construing a paper, “challenging assumptions,” and observing “different perspectives,” to name a duo of biggies. It is still all a matter of what and how – the significant, elusive dimensions rooted in values and abilities. You could for example go after the pattern […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *