Looking at Methodological Issues Normatively

Abstract

The panel attempts to offer bridges between the analytical tradition that underscores conceptual discussion to generate methodological choices and the opposite, rather innovative, arrow of focus: how much methodological choices affect the research output we obtain. This is equivalent to put in motion an effort of including a normative approach to methodological choices as an essential step of empirical inquiry. In particular, we will discuss the effects of sample size choices and the tradeoffs among varying modeling strategies for the research output (and biases) existing in the current literature on Theory of Democracy and Comparative Politics. Papers include quantitative and qualitative approaches to the measurement of latent constructs (such agenda control, quality of democracy and political performance) and of empirical questions (such as whether democracy is a rare event or how does the veto players approach improve the empirical grounds of Comparative Politics). The Panel aims at attracting both theoretical scholars, who are attracted to discuss the importance and the optimal strategy to include normative insights in methodological debates, and empirical oriented scholars, who can contribute to the debates on choices and tradeoffs between different sophisticate modeling strategies.

Title	Details
Conceptualising and Operationalising Political Democracy	View Paper Details
What is Spurious? An Inquiry Across Methods	View Paper Details
Veto Players in Institutional Analysis: The Case of Electoral System Change in Central Eastern Europe	View Paper Details
Game Theory and the Criteria of Applicability	View Paper Details
When democracy is a rare event: methodological challenges in the study of democratization in developing societies	View Paper Details