IR102L, M1. Methods. Take Home 2 (2106).

Jimmy Truong, 19970116-6275

Question 1: Say you are conducting interviews on a politically sensitive topic, such as
support for a far-right movement. As with any interviews, you will need to make
decisions about where and how to conduct them, what questions to ask, and how to
make a record of participants’ responses. What trade-offs might you face between the
validity and reliability of your data in this case?

Trade-offs refer to the relationship between validity and reliability, the stronger the
bases for validity, the weaker the bases for reliability, and vice versa (Halperin & Heath,
2017:174). Qualitative research is conducted with interviews or focus groups, while
quantitative would be gathered from surveys or questionnaires. A reliable research technique
and analytic procedures would reproduce consistent findings if they were repeated on another
occasion or by another researcher (Halperin & Heath, 2017:355).

Halperin & Heath (2017) suggests three types of validity when comparing democracy
as a concept: face validity, content validity, and construct validity. The issue of validity is
deciding whether the indicators that are being used, are suited for the concept. Face validity is
the most straightforward and means that the indicator seems like a good measure of the
concept. Face validity refers to if the indicator of the broad agreement is relevant to the
concept. Content validity examines if the indicator covers the full range of the concept. When
conducting interviews on a sensitive topic, the measure, therefore, neglects important rights
related to politics. Construct validity is the third way to evaluate the validity of an indicator
through empirical analysis and examines how well the measure conforms to the theoretical
expectations. The literature uses press freedom as an association to democracy. To validate
our measure, we need to see if there is a relationship between the two and if there is a
presence, it lends some sort of support to the validity of the measure (Halperin & Heath,
2017:171-172). It is difficult to deal with difficult-to-define concepts. When trying to avoid
them, the approach might lead to vague conclusions and it becomes unreliable (Halperin &
Heath, 2017:355).

As mentioned earlier, reliability refers to how accurately we measure our indicators. If

the validity of our indicators is not accurate, it becomes less reliable. Even if we have valid
indicators, they would not be reliable if they are not accurate and vice versa. By assessing the
reliability of our data, it needs to have a broad agreement among the interviewees. However,

1
 IR102L, M1. Methods. Take Home 2 (2106). Jimmy Truong, 19970116-6275

if the data becomes unreliable, for example when there’s a lot of disagreement. This type of
reliability is referred to as intercoder reliability.

The issues the researcher will have to confront are validity and reliability. Threats to
external validity are most likely to occur if the planning is bad. Things such as dishonest
answers, time of the day where the interview is conducted, and other factors that can produce
a different answer from the interviewee with a risk of being tired or “looking bad” in front of
the interviewer. To avoid trade-offs, asking questions prepared in different regions of the
country and at different times of the day.

A) How do you identify the population of interest? How would you select the cases, and
avoid the risk of selection bias?

Identifying the population of interest to the research question ‘How does transition
towards a democratic political system affect economic growth?’ would be the population in
countries where economic growth has been affected by a transition. From there, we will need
to narrow it down to what cases we should select and then what cases to look at (Halperin &
Heath, 2017:175). The cases we select depends upon the theory we are interested in testing.
Therefore, it’s crucial that the cases we choose to study and analyze can influence the answer
to the question. When it occurs, it’s known as selection bias and the way around this is to
select more cases. The best way to avoid this is to conduct a large-N study and select cases
using random probability methods or to take a full census of cases (Halperin & Heath,
2017:231).

B) Specify the hypothesis linking one (or several) independent variable(s)to the dependent
variable.

A relevant hypothesis to the research question could go along the lines of: “A
democratic political system is something most people strive for. The transition to a
democratic state seems like a difficult task for most states regarding economic growth but has
shown to be beneficial when it is accomplished. Using empirical cases of other countries that
have been through a similar process would make it possible to determine how the transition
affects economic growth”. The independent variables would be transition and democratic,

2
 IR102L, M1. Methods. Take Home 2 (2106). Jimmy Truong, 19970116-6275

whereas the dependent variable is economic growth. The relationship between the two would
indicate the strength of the correlation between the variables, as well as provide useful
insights into how the transition affects economic growth.

C) Describe how you would test the hypothesis; what type of comparative design will you
use?
I would collect my data, designed to test my hypothesis. Gather information from
other countries that have been through a similar process of their GDP and GDP per capita
before and after they became a democracy, but also during the transition period. Large-N
comparative research could test for anomalies within the sample. It would also allow for a
more systematic approach to comparing nations, although be-it at a loss of specificity.
Having a larger sample size might also help with uncovering broader patterns, which could
hold more legitimacy amongst scholars, especially if the research could be replicated. As a
whole, a large-N study would allow for stronger and more representative comparisons.
Using more cases will give the research a solid base and decreasing the risk of selection bias.

I would carry out a Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD), reason this circumstance
is when using MSSD, it allows me to select countries that share many important
characteristics but differ in crucial aspects (Halperin & Heath, 2017:219). Halperin & Heath
(2017) suggests a cross-sectional design when analyzing a sample of a population at a single
point in time and a key feature of this design is that it is concerned with explaining variation
between places over time. (Halperin & Heath, 2017:151).

D) Decide on what countries to compare and explain the rationale behind your case
selection.

It all depends on what type of research and design is of interest when selecting cases.
Sweden and South Korea would be my countries of choice. Sweden became a democracy
around a century ago, whereas South Korea became a democracy more than half a century
ago. Hypothetically, wars are expensive, and the Korean War must have been a costly
process to democracy for South Korea. Although it might be costly at the time, South Korea
has been doing good ever since and their economic growth has not disappointed. Studying

3
 IR102L, M1. Methods. Take Home 2 (2106). Jimmy Truong, 19970116-6275

cases of how both countries' GDP was before, after, and during these transitions gives the
research a solid foundation.

Using historical cases enables the researcher to draw comparative insight into
contemporary issues, to get a fuller and more complete record. Utilizing a most similar
systems design allows me to select countries that share many important characteristics but
differ in crucial aspects (Halperin & Heath, 2017:219). The characteristics they share are the
transition to a democratic political system and differ in the incline or decline of economic
growth.

E) Explain the expectations deriving from your hypothesis.

The expectation derived from the hypothesis is that short-term struggles might occur
during and shortly after the transition period but will be beneficial in the long term. Re-
construction is always challenging, especially when they enter an unknown field. This line of
thought makes sense in the real world as well, where new companies struggle the first few
years to be profitable in the long run. There is a risk that the result might be different from the
hypothesis because of selection bias. Therefore, it is important to select relevant cases to the
question we are trying to answer.

Bibliography

Halperin, S., Heath, O. (2017). Political Research Methods and Practical Skills. 2nd ed.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.