The Writing Center • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Political Science

What this handout is about.

This handout will help you to recognize and to follow writing standards in political science. The first step toward accomplishing this goal 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 struggle of “who gets what, when, how.” This struggle may be as modest as competing interest groups fighting over control of a small municipal budget or as overwhelming as a military stand-off between international superpowers. Political scientists study such struggles, both small 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 focuses on the role of law and courts in the political process.

What is scientific about political science?

Investigating relationships.

Although 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 revealing 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 important 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 important exception to this empirical approach. 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 simple 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 between 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 between 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 instance 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 immediately conclusive results. In this case, for example, although in most recent 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 important 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 command of the facts and their ability 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 important 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 allow 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 important 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 allows 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. For example, here are some criteria that political scientists have suggested are indicators of democracy:

  • Freedom to form and join organizations
  • Freedom of expression
  • Right to vote
  • Eligibility for public office
  • Right of political leaders to compete for support
  • Right of political leaders to compete for votes
  • Alternative sources of information
  • Free and fair elections
  • Institutions for making government policies depend on votes and other expressions of preference

If we adopt these nine criteria, we now have a definition that will allow us to measure democracy empirically. 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 piece 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 ability to understand a complex 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:

  • An introduction
  • A problem statement
  • A discussion of methodology
  • A literature review
  • A description and evaluation of your research findings
  • 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 important. 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 whole. 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. 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. Second, 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 frame of reference that enables the reader to understand the full 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 important information to your reader. This is also the place to suggest further lines of research that will help refine, clarify inconsistencies with, or provide additional support for your hypotheses. Finally, 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 concerned with the scientific measurement of political phenomena than with understanding how important political ideas develop over time. And they are less concerned with evaluating how things are than in debating how they should be. A return 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 proper 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 satisfied with casting votes every couple 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 (2) the manner in which you use the arguments of other theorists to support your own. First, you need to make sure that your conclusion and all points leading up to it follow from your original premises or assumptions. If, for example, you argue that democracy is a system of government through which citizens develop their full 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 probably 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 convincing 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 they have not specified a citation style in the assignment. For more information on constructing citations, see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial.

Although all assignments are different, the preceding outlines provide a clear and simple 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 short guide provides, refer to the list of additional resources below or make an appointment to see a tutor at the Writing Center.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing 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 additional publications. 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 . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Becker, Howard S. 2007. Writing for Social Scientists: How to Start and Finish Your Thesis, Book, or Article , 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cuba, Lee. 2002. A Short Guide to Writing About Social Science , 4th ed. New York: Longman.

Lasswell, Harold Dwight. 1936. Politics: Who Gets What, When, How . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Scott, Gregory M., and Stephen M. Garrison. 1998. The Political Science Student Writer’s Manual , 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Turabian, Kate. 2018. A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, Dissertations , 9th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Warning icon

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

  • Undergraduate
  • Honors Thesis

Award Winning Theses

The following theses are recent examples of outstanding work:.

  • Avery Goods:  "An Inconvenient Group: The Effect of Motivated Messages on Climate Change Attitudes and Behaviors of Skeptic Audiences" 2019 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Joshua Varcie: "The Artificial Incumbency Advantage: How Bipartisan Redistricting Schemes Protect Incumbents" 2019   Janda Prize Honorable Mention for Distinguished Honors Thesis
  • Benjamin Alan Weinberg: " Ballot Challenge: Explaining Voting Rights Restrictions in 21st-Century America"  2018 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Logan Scott Peretz:  "How Hillary May Have Lost the White House: The Electoral Effects of Presidential Campaign Visits in 2016"  2018   Janda Prize Honorable Mention for Distinguished Honors Thesis
  • Aaron Gordon: "An Empirical Appraisal of the Liberty of Contract"  2017 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Hayley Hopkins: "Restrict the Vote: Disenfranchisement as a Political Strategy" 2017 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Matthew Gates: "Ideological Basis for the Gay Rights Movement"  2017   Janda Prize Honorable Mention for Distinguished Honors Thesis
  • Elena Barham: "Passing the Buck: World Bank Anti-Corruption Reform and the Politics of Implementation" 2016 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Remy Smith: "Inherently Unequal: The Effects of Equal Representation on Senate Policy Outcomes" 2016 Janda Prize Honorable Mention for Distinguished Honors Thesis
  • Laura Rozier:  "The Media, the Innocent, and the Public: A Nuanced Look at Exonerations and Public Opinion of the Death Penalty"   2015 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Kaitlyn Chriswell: “Cross-cutting cleavages: Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, Terra Lliure, and the centrality of networks” , 2014 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Jordan Fein:  "Searching for Health Care Reform: Studying Media Coverage and Framing Public Opinion of the 2009-2010 Health Care Debate" , 2011 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Dylan Lewis:  “Unpaid Protectors: Volunteerism and the Diminishing Role of Federal Responsibility in the National Park Service” , 2011 Janda Prize Honorable Mention for Distinguished Honors Thesis
  • Benjamin Zhu:  “Resource Distribution in Post‐PRI Mexico: De‐Politicized or Re‐Politicized?” , 2011 Senior Marshall for Distinguished Honors Thesis
  • Ben Armstrong:  “Ne Touche Pas Ma Constitution: Pressures and Presidential Term Limits” , 2011 Barry Farrell Prize for Academic Achievement
  • Jeffrey Paller:  “Where are the people? The Relationship between Government and Civil Society in South Africa” , 2006 Janda Prize Co-Winner for Best Honors Thesis
  • Samir Mayekar:  “The Piquetero Effect: Examining the Argentine Government’s Response to the Piquetero Movement” , 2006 Janda Prize Co-Winner for Best Honors Thesis 


Janda PRIZE for DISTINGUISHED Honors Thesis REcipients

The Kenneth F. Janda Prize for Distinguished Honors Thesis in Political Science  is awarded annually for the best undergraduate Honors thesis of the year.

Ask Yale Library

My Library Accounts

Find, Request, and Use

Help and Research Support

Visit and Study

Explore Collections

Political Science Subject Guide: Literature Reviews

  • Political Science
  • Books & Dissertations
  • Articles & Databases
  • Literature Reviews
  • Senior Essay Resources
  • Country Information

More Literature Review Writing Tips

  • Thesis Whisperer- Bedraggled Daisy Lay advice on writing theses and dissertations. This article demonstrates in more detail one aspect of our discussion

Books on the Literature Review

examples of political science research papers

What is a literature review?

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. [...] In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries."

(from "The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Writing It," http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review )

Strategies for conducting your own literature review

1. Use this guide as a starting point. Begin your search with the resources linked from the political science subject guide. These library catalogs and databases will help you identify what's been published on your topic.

2. What came first? Try bibliographic tracing. As you're finding sources, pay attention to what and whom these authors cite. Their footnotes and bibliographies will point you in the direction of additional scholarship on your topic.

3. What comes next? Look for reviews and citation reports. What did scholars think about that book when it was published in 2003? Has anyone cited that article since 1971? Reviews and citation analysis tools can help you determine if you've found the seminal works on your topic--so that you can be confident that you haven't missed anything important, and that you've kept up with the debates in your field. You'll find book reviews in JSTOR and other databases. Google Scholar has some citation metrics; you can use Web of Science ( Social Sciences Citation Index ) for more robust citation reports.

4. Stay current. Get familiar with the top journals in your field, and set up alerts for new articles. If you don't know where to begin, APSA and other scholarly associations often maintain lists of journals, broken out by subfield . In many databases (and in Google Scholar), you can also set up search alerts, which will notify you when additional items have been added that meet your search criteria.

5. Stay organized. A citation management tool--e.g., RefWorks, Endnote, Zotero, Mendeley--will help you store your citations, generate a bibliography, and cite your sources while you write. Some of these tools are also useful for file storage, if you'd like to keep PDFs of the articles you've found. To get started with citation management tools, check out this guide . 

How to find existing literature reviews

1. Consult Annual Reviews.  The Annual Review of Political Science consists of thorough literature review essays in all areas of political science, written by noted scholars. The library also subscribes to Annual Reviews in economics, law and social science, sociology, and many other disciplines.

2. Turn to handbooks, bibliographies, and other reference sources. Resources like Oxford Bibliographies Online and assorted handbooks ( Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics , Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior , etc.) are great ways to get a substantive introduction to a topic, subject area, debate, or issue. Not exactly literature reviews, but they do provide significant reference to and commentary on the relevant literature--like a heavily footnoted encyclopedia for specialists in a discipline. 

3. Search databases and Google Scholar.   Use the recommended databases in the "Articles & Databases" tab of this guide and try a search that includes the phrase "literature review."

4. Search in journals for literature review articles.  Once you've identified the important journals in your field as suggested in the section above, you can target these journals and search for review articles. 

5. Find book reviews.  These reviews can often contain useful contextual information about the concerns and debates of a field. Worldwide Political Science Abstracts is a good source for book reviews, as is JSTOR . To get to book reviews in JSTOR, select the advanced search option, use the title of the book as your search phrase, and narrow by item type: reviews. You can also narrow your search further by discipline.

6. Cast a wide net--don't forget dissertations.  Dissertations and theses often include literature review sections. While these aren't necessarily authoritative, definitive literature reviews (you'll want to check in Annual Reviews for those), they can provide helpful suggestions for sources to consider.

  • << Previous: News
  • Next: Senior Essay Resources >>
  • Last Updated: Jan 9, 2024 12:55 PM
  • URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/politicalscience

Yale Library logo

Site Navigation

P.O. BOX 208240 New Haven, CT 06250-8240 (203) 432-1775

Yale's Libraries

Bass Library

Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library

Classics Library

Cushing/Whitney Medical Library

Divinity Library

East Asia Library

Gilmore Music Library

Haas Family Arts Library

Lewis Walpole Library

Lillian Goldman Law Library

Marx Science and Social Science Library

Sterling Memorial Library

Yale Center for British Art

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

@YALELIBRARY

image of the ceiling of sterling memorial library

Yale Library Instagram

Accessibility       Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion      Giving       Privacy and Data Use      Contact Our Web Team    

© 2022 Yale University Library • All Rights Reserved

POLSC101: Introduction to Political Science

Research in political science.

This handout is designed to teach you how to conduct original political science research. While you won't be asked to write a research paper, this handout provides important information on the "scientific" approach used by political scientists. Pay particularly close attention to the section that answers the question "what is scientific about political science?"

If you were going to conduct research in biology or chemistry, what would you do? You would probably create a hypothesis, and then design an experiment to test your hypothesis. Based on the results of your experiment, you would draw conclusions. Political scientists follow similar procedures. Like a scientist who researches biology or chemistry, political scientists rely on objectivity, data, and procedure to draw conclusions. This article explains the process of operationalizing variables. Why is that an important step in social science research?

Defining politics and political science

Political scientist Harold Laswell said it best: at its most basic level, politics is the struggle of "who gets what, when, how". This struggle may be as modest as competing interest groups fighting over control of a small municipal budget or as overwhelming as a military stand-off between international superpowers. Political scientists study such struggles, both small 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 focuses on the role of law and courts in the political process.

What is scientific about political science?

Investigating relationships

Although 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 revealing 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 important 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 important exception to this empirical approach. 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 simple 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 between 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 between 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 instance 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 immediately conclusive results. In this case, for example, although in most recent 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 important 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 command of the facts and their ability 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 important 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 allow 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 important 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 allows 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:

  • Freedom to form and join organizations
  • Freedom of expression
  • Right to vote
  • Eligibility for public office
  • Right of political leaders to compete for support
  • Right of political leaders to compete for votes
  • Alternative sources of information
  • Free and fair elections
  • 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 allow 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 piece 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 ability to understand a complex 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, (2) a problem statement, (3) a discussion of methodology, (4) a literature review, (5) 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 important. 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 whole. 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. 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. Second, 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 frame of reference that enables the reader to understand the full 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 important information to your reader. This is also the place to suggest further lines of research that will help refine, clarify inconsistencies with, or provide additional support for your hypotheses. Finally, 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 concerned with the scientific measurement of political phenomena than with understanding how important political ideas develop over time. And they are less concerned with evaluating how things are than in debating how they should be. A return 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 proper 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 satisfied with casting votes every couple 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 (2) the manner in which you use the arguments of other theorists to support your own. First, you need to make sure that your conclusion and all points leading up to it follow from your original premises or assumptions. If, for example, you argue that democracy is a system of government through which citizens develop their full 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 probably 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 convincing 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.

Although all assignments are different, the preceding outlines provide a clear and simple 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 short guide provides, refer to the list of additional 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 Start and Finish Your Thesis, Book, or Article . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

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

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

Scott, Gregory M. and Stephen M. Garrison. 1998. The Political Science Student Writer's Manual , Second Edition. Upper Saddle River, New 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.

Creative Commons License

UC San Diego

  • Research & Collections
  • Borrow & Request
  • Computing & Technology

UC San Diego

Political Science: Research Methods & Design

  • Using Ebooks guide This link opens in a new window
  • Reference Works
  • Open Educational Resources
  • Search Strategies
  • Advanced Searching, Evidence Synthesis, and Systematic Reviews
  • Reports, Documents, & Policy
  • News guide This link opens in a new window
  • International & Comparative Statistics
  • California Statistics
  • San Diego Statistics
  • Elections guide This link opens in a new window
  • Public Opinion, Social Attitudes and Values
  • Finding Data & Statistics guide This link opens in a new window
  • GIS & Geospatial Technologies guide
  • Law guide This link opens in a new window
  • (Historic) Primary Sources guide This link opens in a new window
  • Researching Congress + Data
  • Congressional Elections + Data
  • Congressional Documents (US Gov Info guide)
  • Researching the Executive Branch + Data
  • Presidential elections + Data
  • Executive Branch Documents (US Gov Info guide) This link opens in a new window
  • Researching the Judicial Branch + Data
  • Finding Case Law
  • Interest Groups + Data
  • US Government Information guide This link opens in a new window
  • State Comparative Politics
  • State and Local elections + Data
  • California Govt guide This link opens in a new window
  • San Diego Govt guide This link opens in a new window
  • Constitution Day guide
  • Foreign Policy
  • Conflict, Military & Security
  • Foreign Govts
  • Elections around the world
  • Lijphart Elections Archive
  • International Govt Info guide This link opens in a new window
  • Global Policy & Strategy Research guide This link opens in a new window
  • Chinese Studies guides This link opens in a new window
  • European Studies guide This link opens in a new window
  • Japanese Studies guide This link opens in a new window
  • Jewish Studies guide This link opens in a new window
  • Korean Studies guide This link opens in a new window
  • Latin American Studies guide This link opens in a new window
  • Pacific Island Studies guide This link opens in a new window
  • South Asian Studies guide This link opens in a new window

Research Methods guides

  • APIs for Scholarly Resources
  • Corpora for Text Analysis
  • How to Cite guide This link opens in a new window
  • Open Access & Scholarly Communications guide This link opens in a new window
  • Creating Scholarly Posters in PowerPoint guide This link opens in a new window
  • Course Guides This link opens in a new window
  • AI and Academic Integrity
  • Additional Resources on Teaching and AI

Licensed by UCSD

  • Writing in Political Science - Duke University Writing Studio 4 page introduction to the basics of political science scholarly communication.
  • Research Methods Knowledge Base The Research Methods Knowledge Base is a comprehensive web-based textbook that addresses all of the topics in a typical introductory undergraduate or graduate course in social research methods. It covers the entire research process including: formulating research questions; sampling (probability and nonprobability); measurement (surveys, scaling, qualitative, unobtrusive); research design (experimental and quasi-experimental); data analysis; and, writing the research paper. It also addresses the major theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of research including: the idea of validity in research; reliability of measures; and ethics.
  • Choosing a Research Design - PHDStudent.com
  • Research Basics - Explorable.com (previously www.experiment-resources.com) Includes sections on: -Research Methods: Formulating questions, collecting data, testing hypotheses -Experimental Research: Setting up experiments -Research Designs: Different types of designs used in research -Statistics in Research: A guide to statistics in research.
  • The Theory and Practice of Field Experiments: An Introduction from the EGAP Learning Days Since 2015, EGAP has conducted week-long workshops on experimental research methods for scholars and evaluation professionals based in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. In these workshops — known as Learning Days — EGAP members from around the world travel to the workshop location to instruct on core topics in causal inference and experimental design, and to work closely one-on-one with participants to develop their research designs. In an effort to create a resource that EGAP members, workshop alumni, and others can use to organize their own workshops or refresh their training, Jake Bowers, Maarten Voors, and Nahomi Ichino have produced an online book. The book is organized around modules on the usual Learning Days topics as well as some new topics. At the heart of each module are slides that workshop facilitators can use directly or adapt for specific audiences. more... less... Authors: Jake Bowers, Maarten Voors, and Nahomi Ichino
  • UC Library Search Search tip: Use these subject headings and keyword searches to find the latest books, ebooks, etc.
  • Political Science Research Methodology books and ebooks
  • Social Sciences Research Methodology books and ebooks
  • Big Data books and ebooks
  • Data Mining books and ebooks
  • Qualitative Research books and ebooks
  • Quantitative Research books and ebooks
  • Questionnaires books and ebooks
  • Social Problems Research books and ebooks
  • Social Sciences Methodology books and ebooks
  • Social Sciences Network Analysis books and ebooks
  • Social Sciences Research Data Processing books and ebooks
  • Social Sciences Statistical Methods books and ebooks
  • Social Surveys Methodology books and ebooks
  • << Previous: Elections guide
  • Next: APIs for Scholarly Resources >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 15, 2024 8:44 AM
  • URL: https://ucsd.libguides.com/politicalscience
  • Technical Support
  • Find My Rep

You are here

Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

Writing a Research Paper in Political Science A Practical Guide to Inquiry, Structure, and Methods

  • Lisa A. Baglione - Saint Joseph's University, USA
  • Description

Even students capable of writing excellent essays still find their first major political science research paper an intimidating experience. Crafting the right research question, finding good sources, properly summarizing them, operationalizing concepts and designing good tests for their hypotheses, presenting and analyzing quantitative as well as qualitative data are all tough-going without a great deal of guidance and encouragement. Writing a Research Paper in Political Science breaks down the research paper into its constituent parts and shows students what they need to do at each stage to successfully complete each component until the paper is finished. Practical summaries, recipes for success, worksheets, exercises, and a series of handy checklists make this a must-have supplement for any writing-intensive political science course.

New to the Fourth Edition:

  • A non-causal research paper woven throughout the text offers explicit advice to guide students through the research and writing process.     
  • Updated and more detailed discussions of plagiarism, paraphrases, "drop-ins," and "transcripts" help to prevent students from misusing sources in a constantly changing digital age.  
  • A more detailed discussion of “fake news” and disinformation shows students how to evaluate and choose high quality sources, as well as how to protect oneself from being fooled by bad sources.  
  • Additional guidance for writing abstracts and creating presentations helps students to understand the logic behind abstracts and prepares students for presentations in the classroom, at a conference, and beyond.  
  • A greater emphasis on the value of qualitative research provides students with additional instruction on how to do it.

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Supplements

“ Writing a Research Paper in Political Science is a helpful research and writing guide for students from various disciplines and undergraduate levels.”

“Lisa A. Baglione’s book is a highly accessible resource to help undergraduate students transition from writing about politics to writing about empirical political science research.” 

“With clarity and compassion, Lisa A. Baglione leads undergraduates step by step through the morass of empirical research.” 

“ Writing a Research Paper in Political Science is an essential text for every political science major.” 

This is an engaging and well written book that seems geared to the level of the course - students writing their senior capstones.

Excellent, in-depth review of how to do a research paper. Perfect for learning objectives of my course.

too focused on political science, not a good fit for urban planning.

NEW TO THIS EDITION: 

  • A non-causal research paper woven throughout the text offers explicit advice to guide students through the research and writing process.
  • Updated and more detailed discussions of plagiarism, paraphrases, “drop-ins,” and “transcripts” help to prevent students from misusing sources in a constantly changing digital age.
  • A more detailed discussion of “fake news” and disinformation shows students how to evaluate and choose high quality sources, as well as how to protect oneself from being fooled by bad sources. 
  • Additional guidance for writing abstracts and creating presentations helps students to understand the logic behind abstracts and prepares students for presentations in the classroom, at a conference, and beyond.
  • A greater emphasis on the value of qualitative research provides students with additional instruction on how to do it.     

KEY FEATURES: 

  • End-of-chapter recipes for annotated bibliographies, literature reviews, thesis formation, and more guides students step-by-step as they navigate common issues when composing a research paper. 
  • Practical summaries , located at the end of each chapter, guide students towards their goals. 
  • Sample material from student papers help illustrate in detail how students can craft and revise their content. 
  • A natural progression of chapter topics guides students from finding a research question and distilling arguments, to revision and proper citation.

Preview this book

Sample materials & chapters.

CHAPTER 1: So You Have to Write a Research Paper

CHAPTER 3: Learning Proper Citation Forms, Finding the Scholarly

For instructors

Select a purchasing option.

Shipped Options:

BUNDLE: Van Belle, A Novel Approach to Politics 6e (Paperback) + Baglione, Writing a Research Paper in Political Science 4e (Paperback)

Society for Political Methodology

An Open Collection of Political Science Research with OLS Models and Cross-Sectional Data

An Open Collection of Political Science Research with OLS Models and Cross-Sectional Data.

Joshua Alley

Department of Politics, University of Virginia

Finding accessible and interesting examples and material for exercises is a common teaching challenge in political science, especially in research methods classes. Introductory courses in political science research methods often cover ordinary least squares (OLS) models in cross-sectional data. Locating examples from published research to illustrate linear regression and give students practice with replicating and assessing published findings is difficult, however. While OLS analyses of cross-sectional data are common in older papers, many of these papers do not have public replication data. Recent publications with accessible replication data rarely use linear regression in cross-sectional data. They instead employ maximum likelihood estimation, panel data, or other techniques outside the scope of introductory courses. Therefore, locating suitable papers and replication data with cross-sectional data and an OLS estimator is difficult even for faculty and is doubly challenging for students.

To provide material for accessible examples and replication exercises in undergraduate and introductory graduate research methods courses, I created an open repository of published research in political science with cross-sectional data and an OLS model . The collection reduces the cost of searching for published work that matches the material in many introductory methods classes. As such, this resource helps teachers and students spend less time searching for suitable examples and replication data, leaving more time for teaching and learning research methods.  

Replications, Extensions and Examples.

Teachers and students of political science can use this data collection for any project they imagine, but I anticipate two core uses. First, the collection facilitates assignments to replicate and diagnose published work. Because examining cross-sectional OLS models helps students develop statistical knowledge and model-checking skills, replication assignments are a common part of introductory undergraduate and graduate courses. One recent textbook guides students through replicating and diagnosing published research (Li 2018).

In a replication assignment, students read a paper, load the associated dataset into their preferred software and reproduce the estimates and inferences from the paper. After replicating the estimates, students can then diagnose the regression. Common OLS diagnostics include tests for influential observations, heteroscedasticity and other violations of the Gauss-Markov assumptions. If the students find that the model violates an assumption, they can then correct the model and see if the results change. Reproducing and diagnosing results can be done with any software package, once students identify the correct variable labels.

Replicating published scholarship allows students opportunities to “practice by doing”, which is essential for learning research methods (Adriaensen et al 2011). Writing up a replication report reinforces common learning objectives such as interpreting regression estimates and understanding statistical inference. Moreover, replication exercises help students learn that all statistical procedures rely on assumptions, and that violating those assumptions can affect conclusions from the model. When a class emphasizes a deeper understanding of regression models, asking students to diagnose a published model also allows teachers to assess knowledge of the Gauss-Markov assumptions and the consequences of violations for regression estimates.

Reproducing and analysing published results makes students more informed consumers of political science research. Assessing the validity of published findings encourages students to engage critically with scholarship. In the face of a “replication crisis’’ in science (Simmons et al 2011), encouraging students to scrutinize published research and carefully check inferences is worthwhile.

Students can also use materials from the repository to answer their own research questions. Extension projects could include changing model specifications, adding new data, or using a dataset to answer a different question, to give three examples. Because most of these datasets are well-organized, students can implement original projects without wrangling data into a usable form. [1]

The repository also provides a store of materials for teaching examples. As the repository expands, it will give teachers a diverse set of examples to show how regression works in practice. Using examples from published research can demonstrate to students how scholars use quantitative methods to answer important and interesting questions.

Currently, the repository contains eleven papers from international relations and comparative politics. [2] Table 1 summarizes the authors, year of publication and title of each article. While I am confident that there are more papers in comparative and American politics scholarship that fit the collection, finding such examples and replication data is difficult, for some of the reasons I outlined in the introduction. By posting the repository publically and inviting contributions of papers and data, I hope the collection will expand and diversify. The next section describes how the access data and references in the collection.

[Table 1 is a the end of this essay]

How to access the repository

The replication collection is freely available online in a Github repository . I use Github to store the collection as it facilitates transparent management of a public resource for teachers and students of political science.  Git and Github offer a transparent way to document changes in the repository over time (Jones 2013). Placing the repository on Github also allows other scholars to upload suitable publications themselves by opening issues or making pull requests. [3] Finally, this repository is meant to be a public resource for the discipline of political science and using Github makes it fully public.

I divided the repository into folders, with one folder for each paper. All the papers contain at least one OLS model with cross-sectional data, although some employ additional data and estimators. Each folder contains data, reference information for the article in a text file, and code if available. Each reference allows users to find the article for themselves, and the file names use the general form author-reference.txt . Most of the data is in Excel or STATA format, and most code is in STATA do-files. [4] I have also included codebooks and online appendices, whenever they are available.

There are two ways to access the contents of the repository. First, teachers and students are free to download clone or fork thewhole repository. Users can also download individual code, or datasets from the folders for each paper. Thus, teachers have three options. They can download the whole repository and provide it for students in a different location such as a campus learning management system, give students data and code from one paper or direct students to the Github repository and ask them to download the materials themselves. After finding and reading a paper, downloading the data and loading it into their software of choice, students can begin replicating and assessing published findings.

The repository has two limitations. First, although Github offers a simple and accessible way to store the collection, the interface is more cluttered than a standard website. When teachers ask students to identify and download a paper themselves, providing an in-class walkthrough could alleviate some of this difficulty. Second, some papers do not have replication code or a codebook, which makes identifying which variables go into models more difficult. These limitations can require individual attention for students, but they are still far less onerous than searching the breadth of political science scholarship.

Concluding thoughts

Finding replication materials for published work with cross-sectional data and an OLS model is difficult. Therefore, I created an online repository of such studies to facilitate teaching examples and replication exercises in introductory research methods and statistics classes. Replication exercises with data from the collection offer research methods students an opportunity to assess their understanding of key concepts. It also gives students experience checking estimates from published papers, so they can critically engage with methodology in published research.  

In closing, I invite other teachers of political science to use and contribute to the repository. Teaching examples and replication exercises are the most likely uses, but I am sure that teachers will find other productive uses. This replication collection is meant to be a public good. I hope that scholars will use and contribute to the collection to advance teaching research methods in political science.

Acknowledgements: Thanks to Quan Li and Wendi Kaspar for helpful comments.

References:

Appel, Benjamin J. and Cyanne E. Loyle. 2012. “The economic benefits of justice: Post-conflict justice and foreign direct investment.” Journal of Peace Research 49(5): 685-99.

Adriaensen, Johan, Bart Kerremans & Koen Slootmaeckers (2015) “Editors’ Introduction to the Thematic Issue: Mad about Methods? Teaching Research Methods in Political Science.” Journal of Political Science Education (11):1, 1-10

Braithwaite, Alex. 2006. “The Geographic Spread of Militarized Disputes.” Journal of Peace Research 43(5): 507-22.

Fuhrmann, Matthew. 2008. “Exporting Mass Destruction? The Determinants of Dual-Use Trade.” Journal of Peace Research 45(5): 633-652.

Furia, Peter A. and Russel A. Lucas. 2008. “Determinants of Arab Public Opinion on Foreign Relations.” International Studies Quarterly 50: 585-605.

Ghobarah, Hazem Adam, Paul Huth, & Bruce Russett. 2004. “Comparative Public Health: The Political Economy of Human Misery and Well-Being.” International Studies Quarterly , 48(1): 73-94.

Goldsmith, Benjamin E. and Yusaku Horiuchi. 2012. “In Search of Soft Power: Does Foreign Public Opinion Matter for US Foreign Policy?” World Politics 64(3): 555-85.

Jones, Zachary M. 2013. “Git/GitHub, Transparency, and Legitimacy in Quantitative Research.” The Political Methodologist 21(1): 6-7.

Kono, Damiel Y. 2006. “Optimal Obfuscation: Democracy and Trade Policy Transparency.” American Political Science Review 100(3): 369-84.

Kono, Daniel Y. 2007. “When Do Trade Blocs Block Trade?” International Studies Quarterly 51(1): 165-181.

Leblang, David A. 1996. “Property Rights, Democracy and Economic Growth.” Political Research Quarterly 49(1) 5-26.

Li, Quan. 2018. Using R for Data Analysis in Social Sciences: A Research Project-oriented Approach . New York: Oxford University Press.

Potter, Joshua D. and Margit Tavits. 2013. “The Impact of Campaign Finance Laws on Party Competition” British Journal of Political Science 45(1): 73-95.

Reuveny, Rafael and Quan Li. 2003.  “Economic Openness, Democracy and Income Inequality: An Empirical Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 36(5): 575-601.

Simmons, Joseph P., Leif D. Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn 2011. “False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant.” Psychological Science 22 (11): 1359-1366.

[1] Data-wrangling, or taking raw data and organizing it for analysis, is a valuable skill. The repository provides opportunities to work with different data formats, but data wrangling and cleaning is often falls beyond the scope of a research methods course.

[2] Examples are concentrated in these subfields due to my substantive interests.

[3] Alternatively, contributors can submit references, code and data by email.

[4] If users do not have a STATA license, they can use R or SPSS to load the data, and examine the contents of do-files using any text editor, such as the Notepad on Windows computers.

View the discussion thread.

ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst

Home > SBS > POLSCI > Political Science Department Masters Theses Collection

Political Science Department Masters Theses Collection

Theses from 2021 2021.

Responsiveness, Representation, and Democracy: A Critical Conceptual Analysis and its Implications for Political Science , Joshua Beck, Political Science

Post-Conflict Recovery or Conflict Recurrence: A Comparative Analysis of Economics, Colonial Histories, and Natural Resource Mining in Burkina Faso and Togo , Izabela Frechette, Political Science

Theses from 2020 2020

Designing Surveys on Youth Immigration Reform: Lessons from the 2016 CCES Anomaly , Saige Calkins, Political Science

Becoming Quasi-Colonial Political Subjects: Garveyism and Labor Organizing in the Tennessee Valley (1921-1945) , Ashley Everson, Political Science

Footing The Bill: an Empirical Look at the Correlation Between Campaign Contributions and Councilor Votes on Split Tax Rates in Massachusetts , Tristan LaLiberte, Political Science

Theses from 2019 2019

Playing by the Rules: A Look into the Relationship between Regime Type and War Crimes , Kelsey Anderson, Political Science

Theses from 2018 2018

Alien Nation , Adam Hoole, Political Science

Theses from 2017 2017

Bailed Out With A Little Help From My Friends: Social Similarity And Currency Swaps During The 2008 Crisis , Timothy Marple, Political Science

Theses from 2016 2016

Assessing the Effects of Heuristic Perceptions on Voter Turnout , Amanda Aziz, Political Science

Theses from 2006 2006

Education in belief system coherency and ideological constraint in Massachusetts. , David Ciuk, Political Science

Sex, wealth, and power : audience and the real Orange County. , Elizabeth K. Krieg, Political Science

Theses from 2003 2003

The impact of national identity in Scotland on devolution. , Jörg-Nicolas Rödger, Political Science

Theses from 2002 2002

A comparative study of the democratization process in Kenya, Malawi and Zambia during the 1990s. , Tilo E. Stolz, Political Science

Russian transformative state capacity : a comparative study of corporate law reform. , Walter P. Thörner, Political Science

The politics of being a citizen : women and citizenship in Rio de Janeiro. , Joanna S. Wheeler, Political Science

Theses from 2001 2001

The German influence on the life and thought of W.E.B. DuBois. , Michaela C. Orizu, Political Science

Theses from 2000 2000

Identity politics and nationalism in the post-Cold War era : a critical approach to understanding mutual hostilities. , Michael R. Kisielewski, Political Science

Theses from 1999 1999

Politics and the popular culture : an examination of the relationship between politics and film and music. , Patrick J. Knightly, Political Science

The United Nations' success in resolving disputes in the post Cold War era. , Kavita Shukla, Political Science

Theses from 1997 1997

Limiting one's policy choices through a currency board : a rewarding shock therapy approach for Estonia? , Ralf W. Boepple, Political Science

Globalization or regionalization : financial flows and business practices in Central Europe and Latin America. , Daniel Arthur Carter, Political Science

Racial integration policy : finding solutions. , Mario M. S. Martins, Political Science

The acceptance of international regimes by Third World countries : China's and Taiwan's compliance with the intellectual property rights regime. , Yueh-Ching Ma, Political Science

The right-wing agenda : how the communications staff impacted the successes and failures of the Reagan administration. , Scott F. Merzbach, Political Science

Theses from 1996 1996

Reorganization of the executive branch of the government of Puerto Rico : theoretical foundations and legitimacy of the administrative state. , Mario Acosta-Velez, Political Science

Contemporary civil-military relations in Brazil and Argentina : bargaining for political reality. , Carlos P. Baía, Political Science

War on-land versus war on-line : how technologies of war affect gender in the military. , Kelly K. Boyce, Political Science

Africa or America : race, culture, and politics in Afrocentric thought. , Brett V. Gadsden, Political Science

Reading personal legal narrative : deconstruction, jurisprudence, & textual politics. , Elizabeth A. Myrick, Political Science

The other nationalists : Marcus Garvey and Pedro Albizu Campos. , Charles R. Venator Santiago, Political Science

Theses from 1995 1995

India : a secular democracy on the decline? , Aradhana Das, Political Science

Internal determinants of foreign policy domestic politics and foreign policy in the Soviet Union and the United States, 1945-1948. , Kornel B. Dura, Political Science

Freedom of expression in the U.S. and Japan : a comparative study of the regulation of obscene materials. , Yuko Watanabe, Political Science

Theses from 1994 1994

A Two-Level Games Analysis of the Agricultural Trade Negotiations Between the United States and the European Community in the Uruguay Round , Byung-hwa Chung, Political Science

Foreign lobbying in Washington, D.C. , Gerd Foehrenbach, Political Science

Neither deathsquads nor democrats : explaining the behavior of the Salvadoran military. , Stett D. Holbrook, Political Science

Institutional structure and sustainable development : the influence of non-governmental organizations on the environmental policy of UNEP and the World Bank. , Ortrud Elisabeth Kamps, Political Science

Theses from 1993 1993

Fostering democracy in eastern Europe. , Andreas Staab, Political Science

Theses from 1992 1992

Benazir Bhutto : her political struggle in Pakistan. , Kimie Sekine, Political Science

Theses from 1991 1991

An engaged aesthetic : Aids activism through cultural practice. , Jennifer Kates, Political Science

Maintaining a Machiavellian perspective. , Marco F. Monoc, Political Science

The Czechoslovakian reaction to perestroika : an examination of political and economic change in Czechoslovakia from 1985 to 1990. , Edward J. Valla, Political Science

Theses from 1990 1990

A study of the pariah in Hannah Arendt's theory of action. , Tobi B. Elkin, Political Science

U.S. foreign policy and Israeli nuclear weapons, 1957-1982. , John L. Galligan, Political Science

The Soviet Union and eastern Europe : considerations in a political transformation of the Soviet bloc. , Dag Wincens Noren, Political Science

Theses from 1989 1989

The United States security policy in the tripolar nuclear power system : how China's attainment of mutual assured destruction (MAD) capability would affect the U.S. security policy. , Maki Tagaya, Political Science

Theses from 1988 1988

Religion, secularization and politics : the case of the Federal Republic of Germany. , Bernhard Boll, Political Science

The role of the meda in international affairs : an analysis of the media's role in relations between West Germany and Israel. , Lila B. Orbach, Political Science

Theses from 1987 1987

Polwar, the politicization of military forces : history, theory and practice. , Pascal Ronald Politano, Political Science

European political cooperation at the United Nations General Assembly in the 1980's. , Klaus-Dieter Stadler, Political Science

Theses from 1986 1986

The place of the philosopher. , Jeffrey B. Diamond, Political Science

Theses from 1985 1985

The law and policy of control : presidential papers and school library books. , Pamela R. McKay, Political Science

Politics and pleasures : sexual controversies in the women's and lesbian/gay liberation movements. , Lisa J. Orlando, Political Science

Theses from 1984 1984

The elite status of think tank directors : corporate liberals versus the New Right. , Beata Panagopoulos, Political Science

Theses from 1982 1982

Definitions of political power: a case study. , Thomas F. Gilmartin, Political Science

Theses from 1981 1981

The Joint Chiefs of Staff and National Security Policy, 1945 to 1950 : The Joint Chiefs of Staff's perception of the external threat. , Mikael Sondergaard, Political Science

Implementation: policy becomes reality. , Walter K. Steiner, Political Science

Theses from 1980 1980

The aesthetic community : the social and political thought of Paul Goodman. , Willard Francis Petry, Political Science

Theses from 1979 1979

Ethos maintenance in Peruvian politics. , Michael D. Altfillisch, Political Science

Lenin: the party, revolution and politics. , William Francis Leahy, Political Science

Eurocommunism, Spain, and the views of Santiago Carrillo. , Joseph Anthony Nicastro, Political Science

Theses from 1978 1978

Indo-Pakistan relations (1972-1977) , Baderunissa Channah, Political Science

Army rule in Pakistan : a case study of a military regime. , Marguerite Maude Riley, Political Science

Theses from 1977 1977

The political posture of the Roman Catholic Church in Latin America with specific reference to Colombia and Chile. , Ronnie Glantz Harrington, Political Science

Continuity vs. change in Southern Africa : the reality of legal reform and social change in Portuguese speaking Africa, (1950-early 1960's) , Betty J. Shaw, Political Science

The Massachusetts generic drug law : a history, 1967-1976. , James A. Smith, Political Science

Theses from 1976 1976

A systems analysis of cooperative federalism : the disability insurance program as a case study. , David Carl Baker, Political Science

The external setting of contemporary Japanese foreign policy. , Douglas Clarke Durham, Political Science

The Yippies.: an inquiry into the concept of cultural revolution. , Joseph R. Porcari, Political Science

Theses from 1975 1975

Urban renewal and the Springfield Health Department : effect of a federal program on a local unit of government. , Max Garber, Political Science

The 1966 Maryland gubernatorial election : the political saliency of open occupancy. , Michael S. Hatfield, Political Science

Critical movements in American politics: the vote for George Wallace in 1968. , Walter S. Jonas, Political Science

The Office for Children.: administrative advocacy. , Paul Joseph Sherry, Political Science

Theses from 1974 1974

The concept of modernization and development in Marx's, Lenin's and Marxist-Leninist thought. , Barry Blufer, Political Science

Fascism in western Europe in the inter-war period : historical and comparative perspectives. , Elaine Marie Brady, Political Science

Amin: his seizure and rule in Uganda. , James Francis Hanlon, Political Science

The politics of education : a case study of personnel policy making. , Marilee Hartley, Political Science

Manpower programs : government's response to the occupational needs of the poor. , Philip D. Lerner, Political Science

Namibia : the trust territory. , Olugbemi Moloye, Political Science

National Convention Reform: revision of delegate selection procedures in the Democratic Party 1968-1972. , Joseph J. Nogueira, Political Science

Anarchist social science : its origins and development. , Rochelle Ann Potak, Political Science

John Foster Dulles : pragmatist or moralist. , Harry Park Tolles, Political Science

Theses from 1973 1973

The public-private dichotomy : two contemporary case studies. , Timothy W. Armour, Political Science

Student movement, political development and modernisation in India. , Rita Braz, Political Science

Political development, the People's Party of Pakistan and the elections of 1970. , Meenakshi Gopinath, Political Science

NASA's patent policies and the problem of technology transfer. , Philip Joseph Lang, Political Science

A model for rational decision-making in administration of mental retardation services. , Ellsworth Alden Pearl, Political Science

The emergence of Bangla Desh. , Bannu A. Shrikhande, Political Science

Theses from 1972 1972

The evolution of the Yugoslav policy of nonalignment. , Donald S. Connors, Political Science

The Massachusetts Racial Imbalance Act : the administration of public policy at the state and local levels. , Barbara Garde Garvey, Political Science

The Supreme Court, freedom of expression, and the law of libel. , James J. Magee, Political Science

Theses from 1970 1970

Four European neutrals and European integration. , George C. Grosscup, Political Science

Theses from 1965 1965

The United States Congress conference committee system and reciprocal trade legislation, 1951-1962. , Ernest A. Chaples, Political Science

Theses from 1961 1961

Political ideas of Harold J. Laski. , Yŏng-jun Kim, Political Science

Some political novels of the New Industrial Age, 1873-1915. , Roger P. Leemhuis, Political Science

Theses from 1960 1960

A case history in zoning: the Holyoke, Massachusetts experience. , Michael P. Curran, Political Science

The British Labour Party and the reform of the House of Lords, 1918 to date. , Yousan Wang, Political Science

Theses from 1941 1941

The United States and the world court. , Eleanor B. Julian, Political Science

Advanced Search

  • Notify me via email or RSS
  • Collections
  • Disciplines

Author Corner

  • Login for Faculty Authors
  • Faculty Author Gallery
  • Expert Gallery
  • University Libraries
  • Political Science Website
  • UMass Amherst

This page is sponsored by the University Libraries.

© 2009 University of Massachusetts Amherst • Site Policies

Privacy Copyright

ORU Library logo

  • Article Databases
  • Related Databases
  • Newspaper Databases

Search Examples and TIPS

Search strategies, search expression examples, search examples, find articles in a selected journal.

  • Books/Ebooks
  • MLA Citations
  • Cited References

The examples below are provided to support the information provided and practice searches used during the LIBBI session. Use the links below to review the sample search strategies and evaluate the lists of search results. Search, then tweak and edit the terms, search fields, subjects, databases, etc. to match your sr. paper research needs. Use your personal folder in EBSCO to save and manage your information. Please inquire at the Library Services Desk if you assistance, use opens new window Ask-A-Librarian , or opens new window request an appointment with a librarian . Use as few or as many terms needed to get relevant results. Set restrictions for source types, dates, thesaurus and/or subjects. (DE= descriptors or subjects)

✓ Combine a previous search with another search or new terms.combine keyword and subject searching.

✓ In EBSCO databases, use the Search History show/hide link to view a list of your previous searches.

✓ Use CTRL+F, then key in a term to see where it occurs in the document.

✓ Use available limiters to refine your search. What are your paper requirements? Set relevant limits, such as Date, Scholarly Peer-Reviewed articles, and other limiters to refine your search.

Use the chart below to guide you in developing effective search expressions.

Search Strategies

Compare the results of a variety of search expressions and resources. (DE = subject)

  • opens new window DE "DRONE aircraft" AND "international law" (in Legal Collection, Military & Government Collection databases) opens new window DE "Slavery"AND DE "GENOCIDE" (in Humanities Source; two subject searches)
  • opens new window slavery AND genocide (in Humanities Source, Academic Search Complete; keyword search)
  • opens new window DE "RELIGION & politics" AND ( effect* or caus* or outcome* ) (in Political Science Complete, Humanities Source; keyword and subject search) opens new window DE "Politics and religion" AND (effect* or influenc* or impact*) (in ATLA Religion; subject search)

TOPIC: Support and education of women victims of human trafficking Possible keywords: human trafficking, women, education, intervention, support, support groups, victims, trauma, escape, psychological, emotional, recovery, intervention strategies

Sample searches: • opens new window DE "human trafficking" AND women AND education AND U.S. (in Academic Search complete, APA PsycARTICLES, PscyINFO, SocINDEX with Full Text) • opens new window women victims AND human trafficking AND education AND support (42 results, in ASC, APA PsycARTICLES, PscyINFO, SocINDEX) • opens new window women victims in human trafficking fact sheet site:.gov (Web search in Google) Sample article: opens new window Preventing, Education and Intervention Strategies in Combating Human Trafficking... by NACSW

TOPIC: The effects of U.S. Supreme Court decisions on juvenile drug offenders

Possible keywords: supreme court cases, history, chronology, juvenile sentences, juvenile courts, advocates, convictions, juvenile corrections, violent offenders vs. non-violent offenders, outcomes, effects, criminal procedures, repeat offenders, etc.

Sample searches: • opens new window juvenile AND (conviction* or sentenc*) AND drug AND (violent or non-violent) (~196 results, in Academic Search Complete, SocINDEX with Full Text, America: History and Life with Full Text, Military & Government Collection, Political Science Complete) • opens new window DE "DISCRIMINATION in juvenile justice administration" OR DE "TRIAL & sentencing of children as adults" (~119 results, in ASC, SocINDEX, America: History and Life, Military & Government Collection, PSC) • opens new window DE "DISCRIMINATION in juvenile justice administration" OR DE "TRIAL & sentencing of children as adults" AND supreme court cases (~39 results, in ASC, SocINDEX, America: History and Life, Military & Government Collection, PSC) • opens new window U.S. Supreme Court AND cases AND juvenile AND drug AND (conviction* or sentenc*) (~8 results, in ASC, SocINDEX, America: History and Life, Military & Government Collection, PSC) • opens new window U.S. Supreme Court AND juvenile AND (conviction* or sentenc*) (~336 results, in ASC, SocINDEX, America: History and Life, Military & Government Collection, PSC) • " opens new window After Supreme Court Ruling, States Act on Juvenile Sentences " (~1 article, Web search on PEW: Stateline) • opens new window U.S. Supreme Court cases juvenile (in Ebook Central ebooks, ~10,555 results)

  • Find articles on conflict management in Policy Studies Journal Search:
  • Go to the opens new window Journal Finder+ .
  • Key in the journal title. To search a specific database and view the detailed journal record, click a database name with full text access. To search all listed "Full Text Access" databases, use "Search within Publication" and key in your term(s) or topic(s).

opens new window JN "Policy Studies Journal" and "conflict management "

Video tutorial: How to find an article from a citation .

  • << Previous: Newspaper Databases
  • Next: Journals >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 1, 2024 5:36 PM
  • URL: https://library.oru.edu/course_GOV449-499

Research Paper

Category: political science research paper examples.

Political Science Research Paper Examples

We have collected almost 100 example papers on the most important political science research paper topics . This collection of political science research paper examples highlights the most important topics, issues, questions, and debates that any student obtaining a degree in this field ought to have mastered. The purpose is to provide students in political science with an authoritative reference source that will help their research paper writing efforts with far more detailed information than short essays.

Political Science Research Paper

Explore your training options in 10 minutes Get Started

  • Graduate Stories
  • Partner Spotlights
  • Bootcamp Prep
  • Bootcamp Admissions
  • University Bootcamps
  • Coding Tools
  • Software Engineering
  • Web Development
  • Data Science
  • Tech Guides
  • Tech Resources
  • Career Advice
  • Online Learning
  • Internships
  • Apprenticeships
  • Tech Salaries
  • Associate Degree
  • Bachelor's Degree
  • Master's Degree
  • University Admissions
  • Best Schools
  • Certifications
  • Bootcamp Financing
  • Higher Ed Financing
  • Scholarships
  • Financial Aid
  • Best Coding Bootcamps
  • Best Online Bootcamps
  • Best Web Design Bootcamps
  • Best Data Science Bootcamps
  • Best Technology Sales Bootcamps
  • Best Data Analytics Bootcamps
  • Best Cybersecurity Bootcamps
  • Best Digital Marketing Bootcamps
  • Los Angeles
  • San Francisco
  • Browse All Locations
  • Digital Marketing
  • Machine Learning
  • See All Subjects
  • Bootcamps 101
  • Full-Stack Development
  • Career Changes
  • View all Career Discussions
  • Mobile App Development
  • Cybersecurity
  • Product Management
  • UX/UI Design
  • What is a Coding Bootcamp?
  • Are Coding Bootcamps Worth It?
  • How to Choose a Coding Bootcamp
  • Best Online Coding Bootcamps and Courses
  • Best Free Bootcamps and Coding Training
  • Coding Bootcamp vs. Community College
  • Coding Bootcamp vs. Self-Learning
  • Bootcamps vs. Certifications: Compared
  • What Is a Coding Bootcamp Job Guarantee?
  • How to Pay for Coding Bootcamp
  • Ultimate Guide to Coding Bootcamp Loans
  • Best Coding Bootcamp Scholarships and Grants
  • Education Stipends for Coding Bootcamps
  • Get Your Coding Bootcamp Sponsored by Your Employer
  • GI Bill and Coding Bootcamps
  • Tech Intevriews
  • Our Enterprise Solution
  • Connect With Us
  • Publication
  • Reskill America
  • Partner With Us

Career Karma

  • Resource Center
  • Bachelor’s Degree
  • Master’s Degree

The Top 10 Most Interesting Political Science Research Topics

Coming up with good political science research topics may seem like a daunting task. Whether you’re interested in foreign policy, international conflict, or immigration policy, it is worthwhile to take some time to research and find out which topics are currently relevant before diving into research. You want a topic that is manageable and meaningful. After all, you are going to invest a good deal of time and effort in answering the central questions of your project.

In this article, we will show you ten examples of political science research topics for bachelor’s degree students. We also show you how to craft political science research questions that work. With this list of currently relevant political science research paper topics, you can be sure you’ll work on something meaningful and relevant.

Find your bootcamp match

What makes a strong political science research topic.

A strong research topic is original and relevant. It builds on previous studies published by reputable sources. It’s broad enough to be relatable but narrow enough to be unique. To get some ideas, you can explore the most recent topics published in Cambridge University Press’s American Political Science Review . It covers all areas of political science, from American politics to foreign relations.

Ask teachers from your academic department what they are currently writing about. Talk to your academic advisor if you can’t find a strong topic. Finally, make sure that your topic follows the guidelines set by your teacher.

Tips for Choosing a Political Science Research Topic

  • Pick a meaningful topic. The research will be more enjoyable if you find it personally interesting. For instance, if immigration policy is a topic of personal value to you, you can center your research topic around it and this will help you stay engaged in your research.
  • Discuss research ideas with classmates. They can help you find insight from a fresh perspective.
  • Make sure your topic has a manageable size. One of the major requirements for choosing a topic is making sure that it will be manageable. Explore some key questions in your chosen field until you narrow your own topic down to something you can take on successfully.
  • Use reputable sources. Choose authoritative articles published in peer-reviewed journals. Make sure you choose the ones relevant to your topic, whether that is democratic governments, the political behavior of a particular group, or a particular authoritarian regime.
  • Join the current scholarly debate. Make your topic part of cutting-edge research. Discussing things like current forms of government or current political events will help you ensure your chosen topic will contribute to salient issues of political theory as well as critical policy debates.

What’s the Difference Between a Research Topic and a Research Question?

A research topic is a focused area of study in a scientific field or subfield. The goal of the research question is to narrow down that area even further. By answering the research question, you contribute to understanding the topic. The research question guides your research and writing, leading you to make a contribution to that particular topic and field.

How to Create Strong Political Science Research Questions

Gather information on your topic to get familiar with the current research. Find an interesting aspect to explore. Identify the gaps in the research mentioned in articles about your topic. Now, try to find a question that would address that gap.

Start your question with what, why, when, or how. The question must be clear and focused. You can also use guides to develop a research question by narrowing the topic to help you get started.

Top 10 Political Science Research Paper Topics

1. building government capacity to address global environmental challenges.

Complex tradeoffs are part of environmental policy, especially in the 21st Century. Green technology investments can boost the economy and create jobs. But workers in the oil and coal industry will lose them. This is all part of an ongoing discussion about environmental protection and the political attitudes of different groups towards green policies.

The public will support climate policy only if the costs are fairly distributed. Governments have to generate transparent policies to earn the trust of the citizens. This controversial topic demands a good deal of research, an understanding of environmental policy, an analysis of policy outcomes, and the development of new political theories.

2. Influence of Social Movements and Advocacy Groups on Policymaking

The government often makes its policies behind closed doors. In response, social movements organize to get access to and take part in policymaking. Every representative democracy needs the participation of social movements and advocacy groups. They help to hold the American government accountable, ensuring the human rights of citizens are protected.

Social movements and advocacy groups have a powerful influence on public opinion, and can influence the political participation of specific groups. American politics has to consider their ideas to improve political attitudes. Political science researchers have to expand on this topic to understand collective action.

3. Effect of an Interdependent World on the Roles of Governments and Institutions

Many of the policy challenges at a domestic level are now global, and political leaders know this. Governments need policies to regulate institutions, promote international cooperation, and lessen political disputes. They need to train their workforce with a global mindset. This also has a direct impact on political campaigns and electoral politics.

As globalization influences the political development of all nations, government employees are now working on an international stage. They need knowledge of international relations to share knowledge and collaborate. Policymaking for an interdependent world is a relevant political science topic.

4. Prosperity and Equality Through Public Policy

The COVID-19 pandemic is challenging the financial stability of many families. Technological disruptions cause unexpected changes in the international markets. Clearly, we cannot take for granted the economic resilience of the country. The government uses economic policy to protect prosperity and equality. Economic development is a major topic in political science research.

5. Factors Influencing Policymaking Around Taxes, Regulation, and Trade

Tax policy affects economic development and social progress. Economic reform is part of the international conversation on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development . Trade regulation and immigration policies are frequently discussed in political science research, making them a great topic for any aspiring political scientist.

6. Influence of Gender, Race, Class, and Other Aspects of Identity on Policymaking

Diversity and intersectionality are becoming necessary topics in modern politics. Educational institutions and public companies are adopting equity and inclusion goals. The expectations for incorporating diversity in policymaking are higher than ever. Policymaking to prevent discrimination and create the grounds for fair immigration policy is a highly relevant topic.

7. The Role of Government in Providing Affordable Healthcare

Universal Health Coverage (UHU) is a World Health Organization (WHO) initiative to provide global access to healthcare services. The United States has reaffirmed its commitment to achieving this goal.

The COVID-19 pandemic made clear the need for international cooperation in health. International relations theories have to change to make UHU possible. Global health policymaking is a pressing research topic in modern politics.

8. Mitigating Cyber Breaches And Security Challenges Through Policymaking

Countries are adopting cyber security strategies through policymaking. Some of them have a dedicated agency for cyber security. Worldwide, information and technology assets are growing in importance. Cyber security is now part of contemporary world politics and the economic development of nations.

Cyber regulation comes with a whole new set of policymaking challenges that contemporary world politics needs to tackle. It involves international cooperation and coordination. Policymaking to neutralize cyber threats is a growing topic in modern politics research.

9. Harnessing Data for Good Governance

Partnerships between public institutions and private companies facilitate the use of big data. This comes with several institutional challenges, like combining data sources. Regulating data access and addressing privacy concerns will need extensive policymaking. Modernizing data governance is a current topic in political science research.

10. Regulating Disinformation In the United States Through Public Policy

Americans are turning to social media and biased websites to make sense of politics. The proliferation of misinformation is fueling division and polarization, and can depress public confidence and discourage political participation. Regulating disinformation through public policy is becoming an urgent topic.

Regulating freedom of speech is not common in the American political tradition. Political scientists use cost-benefit analysis to find balanced solutions for these complex problems. There are growing opportunities for research on the topic of misinformation regulation and the role of government in the digital age.

Other Examples of Political Science Research Topics & Questions

Political science research topics.

  • Ethnic Conflict Between Americans and Arab-Americans in the United States
  • Telecommunications Policies in China
  • The Supreme Court and Reproductive Rights
  • The Evolution of Affirmative Action Initiatives
  • The Development of a Constitutional Right of Privacy

Political Science Research Questions

  • How can public leaders balance political realities and policy priorities?
  • What developments in science and technology are changing political attitudes?
  • Will public-private partnerships change the approach of government to public problems?
  • How do policymakers navigate the tensions between private power and democratic values?
  • How can public policymaking integrate a human rights perspective?

Choosing the Right Political Science Research Topic

It is important to know how to choose a research topic if you want to pursue a political science degree . The right political science research topic is engaging and manageable. Choose a topic that is interesting to you. It will keep you engaged and motivated during the research process. Keep in mind that your initial research topic might change. As your expertise grows, your topic will become more precise.

Political Science Research Topics FAQ

Political science is a field of knowledge that studies political phenomena. American politics, political theories, and international politics are common topics in political science. Political scientists use comparative politics and policy analysis to improve public problems.

Political science research is important because it improves public policies and can lead to necessary legal reform. It helps citizens understand American politics and foreign policy issues. Research in political science improves international cooperation and global environmental policies, and helps us make sense of major world events.

Yes, you can get a political science degree online. You can get a bachelor’s or a master’s degree in political science without going to college. There are several online political science degree options from good universities. With a Graduate Equivalency Degree (GED), you can get a political science associate degree in two years.

Venus profile photo

"Career Karma entered my life when I needed it most and quickly helped me match with a bootcamp. Two months after graduating, I found my dream job that aligned with my values and goals in life!"

Venus, Software Engineer at Rockbot

With a degree in political science, you can get a job as a legislative assistant or a campaign manager. Social media managers for political institutions are also in demand. With a graduate degree in political science, you can become a policy analyst or an urban planner. Political scientists can work in either academia or the private sector.

About us: Career Karma is a platform designed to help job seekers find, research, and connect with job training programs to advance their careers. Learn about the CK publication .

What's Next?

icon_10

Get matched with top bootcamps

Ask a question to our community, take our careers quiz.

Jose Salgado

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Apply to top tech training programs in one click

Grad Coach

Research Topics & Ideas: Politics

100+ Politics-Related Research Ideas To Fast-Track Your Project

Political science research topics and ideas

Finding and choosing a strong research topic is the critical first step when it comes to crafting a high-quality dissertation or thesis. If you’ve landed on this post, chances are you’re looking for a politics-related research topic , but aren’t sure where to start. Here, we’ll explore a variety of politically-related research ideas across a range of disciplines, including political theory and philosophy, comparative politics, international relations, public administration and policy.

NB – This is just the start…

The topic ideation and evaluation process has multiple steps . In this post, we’ll kickstart the process by sharing some research topic ideas. This is the starting point, but to develop a well-defined research topic, you’ll need to identify a clear and convincing research gap , along with a well-justified plan of action to fill that gap.

If you’re new to the oftentimes perplexing world of research, or if this is your first time undertaking a formal academic research project, be sure to check out our free dissertation mini-course. Also, be sure to sign up for our free webinar that explores how to find a high-quality research topic from scratch.

Overview: Politics-Related Topics

  • Political theory and philosophy
  • Comparative politics
  • International relations
  • Public administration
  • Public policy
  • Examples of politics-related dissertations

Topics & Ideas: Political Theory

  • An analysis of the impact of feminism on political theory and the concept of citizenship in Saudi Arabia in the context of Vision 2030
  • A comparative study of the political philosophies of Marxism and liberalism and their influence on modern politics
  • An examination of how the Covid-19 pandemic affected the relationship between individual freedom and collective responsibility in political philosophy
  • A study of the impact of race and ethnicity on French political philosophy and the concept of justice
  • An exploration of the role of religion in political theory and its impact on secular democracy in the Middle East
  • A Review of Social contract theory, comparative analysis of the political philosophies of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau
  • A study of the concept of the common good in political philosophy and its relevance to the ongoing refugee crisis in Europe
  • An examination of the relationship between political power and the rule of law in developing African countries
  • A study of the impact of postmodernism on political theory and the concept of truth, a case study of the US
  • An exploration of the role of virtue in political philosophy and its impact on the assessment of moral character in political leaders

Topics & Ideas: Comparative Politics

  • A comparative study of different models of federalism and their impact on democratic governance: A case Study of South American federalist states
  • The impact of ethnic and religious diversity on political stability and democracy in developing countries, a review of literature from Africa
  • An analysis of the role of civil society in promoting democratic change in autocratic regimes: A case study in Sweden
  • A comparative examination of the impact of globalization on political institutions and processes in South America and Africa.
  • A study of the factors that contribute to successful democratization in authoritarian regimes, a review of the role of Elite-driven democratization
  • A comparison of the political and economic systems of China and India and their impact on social development
  • The impact of corruption on political institutions and democracy in South East Asia, a critical review
  • A comparative examination of the impact of majoritarian representation (winner-take-all) vs proportional representation on political representation and governance
  • An exploration of Multi-party systems in democratic countries and their impact on minority representation and policy-making.
  • A study of the factors that contribute to successful decentralization and regional autonomy, a case study of Spain

Research Topic Kickstarter - Need Help Finding A Research Topic?

Topics & Ideas: International Relations

  • A comparative analysis of the effectiveness of diplomacy and military force in resolving international conflicts in Central Africa.
  • The impact of globalization on the sovereignty of nation-states and the changing nature of international politics, a review of the role of Multinational Corporations
  • An examination of the role of international aid organizations in promoting peace, security, and development in the Middle East.
  • A study of the impact of economic interdependence on the likelihood of conflict in international relations: A critical review of weaponized interdependence
  • A comparative analysis of the foreign policies of the EU and the US and their impact on international stability in Africa
  • An exploration of the relationship between international human rights and national sovereignty during the Covid 19 pandemic
  • A study of the role of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAO)s in international politics and their impact on state behaviour
  • A comparative analysis of the effectiveness of international regimes in addressing global challenges such as climate change, arms control, and terrorism in Brazil
  • An examination of the impact of the rise of BRICS on the international system and global governance
  • A study of the role of ideology in shaping the foreign policies of states and the dynamics of international relations in the US

Free Webinar: How To Find A Dissertation Research Topic

Tops & Ideas: Public Administration

  • An analysis of the impact of digital technology on public administration and the delivery of public services in Estonia
  • A review of models of public-private partnerships and their impact on the delivery of public services in Ghana
  • An examination of the role of civil society organizations in monitoring and accountability of public administration in Papua New Guinea
  • A study of the impact of environmentalism as a political ideology on public administration and policy implementation in Germany
  • An exploration of the relationship between public administration and citizen engagement in the policy-making process, an exploration of gender identity concerns in schools
  • A comparative analysis of the efficiency and effectiveness of public administration, decentralisation and pay and employment reform in developing countries
  • A study of the role of collaborative leadership in public administration and its impact on organizational performance
  • A systematic review of the challenges and opportunities related to diversity and inclusion in police services
  • A study of the impact of corrupt public administration on economic development and regional growth in Eastern Europe
  • An exploration of the relationship between public administration and civil rights and liberties, including issues related to privacy and surveillance, a case study in South Korea

Research topic evaluator

Topics & Ideas: Public Policy

  • An analysis of the impacts of public policy on income inequality and poverty reduction in South Sudan
  • A comparative study of the effectiveness of legal and regulatory, economic and financial, and social and cultural instruments for addressing climate change in South Korea
  • An examination of the role of interest groups in shaping public policy and the policy-making process regarding land-use claims
  • A study of the impact of globalization on the development of public policies and programs for mitigating climate change in Singapore
  • An exploration of the relationship between public policy and social justice in tertiary education in the UAE
  • A comparative analysis of the impact of health policies for the management of diabetes on access to healthcare and health outcomes in developing countries
  • Exploring the role of evidence-based policymaking in the design and implementation of public policies for the management of invasive invertebrates in Australia
  • An examination of the challenges and opportunities of implementing educational dietary public policies in developing multicultural countries
  • A study of the impact of public policies on urbanization and urban development in rural Indonesia
  • An exploration of the role of media and public opinion in shaping public policy and the policy-making process in the transport industry of Malaysia

Examples: Politics Dissertations & Theses

While the ideas we’ve presented above are a decent starting point for finding a politics-related research topic, they are fairly generic and non-specific. So, it helps to look at actual dissertations and theses to see how this all comes together.

Below, we’ve included a selection of research projects from various politics-related degree programs to help refine your thinking. These are actual dissertations and theses, written as part of Master’s and PhD-level programs, so they can provide some useful insight as to what a research topic looks like in practice.

  • We, the Righteous Few: Immoral Actions of Fellow Partisans are Judged as Less Possible (Varnam, 2020)
  • Civilizing the State: Civil Society and the Politics of Primary Public Health Care Provision in Urban Brazil (Gibson, 2012)
  • Political regimes and minority language policies: evidence from Taiwan and southeast Asia (Wu, 2021)
  • The Feminist Third Wave: Social Reproduction, Feminism as Class Struggle, and Contemporary Women’s Movements (Angulo, 2019)
  • The Politics of Immigration under Authoritarianism (Joo, 2019)
  • The politics of digital platforms: Sour Dictionary, activist subjectivities, and contemporary cultures of resistance (Okten, 2019)
  • Vote choice and support for diverse candidates on the Boston City Council At-Large (Dolcimascolo, 2022)
  • The city agenda: local governance and national influence in the policy agenda, 1900-2020 (Shannon, 2022)
  • Turf wars: who supported measures to criminalize homelessness in Austin, Texas? (Bompiedi, 2021)
  • Do BITs Cause Opposition Between Investor Rights and Environmental Protection? (Xiong, 2022)
  • Revealed corruption and electoral accountability in Brazil: How politicians anticipate voting behavior (Diaz, 2021)
  • Intersectional Solidarity: The Political Consequences of a Consciousness of Race, Gender and Sexuality (Crowder, 2020)
  • The Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Coalitional Representation of Latinxs in the U.S. House of Representatives (Munoz, 2019)

Looking at these titles, you can probably pick up that the research topics here are quite specific and narrowly-focused , compared to the generic ones presented earlier. In other words, to create a top-notch research topic, you must be precise and target a specific context with specific variables of interest . In other words, you need to identify a clear, well-justified research gap.

Get 1:1 Help

If you’re still feeling a bit unsure about how to find a research topic for your dissertation or research project, check out our Topic Kickstarter service below.

You Might Also Like:

Research topics and ideas in psychology

Interesting thesis.

Manu Adamu

I really appreciate your work which will greatly help me rethink on my topic

Ibrahim Abdullahi

Please how can I get the full thesis?

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

  • Print Friendly

Political Science

Altmetric Attention Score: 214

Public Policy Research Paper

Academic Writing Service

View sample Public Policy Research Paper. Browse other research paper examples and check the list of political science  research paper topics for more inspiration. If you need a research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Also, chech our custom research proposal writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

I. Introduction

Academic writing, editing, proofreading, and problem solving services, get 10% off with 24start discount code, ii. public administration as a foundation for the study of public policy, iii. open-systems administration, iv. stages models of public policy, v. agenda setting, vi. policy formulation and adoption, vii. decision-making models and policy formulation and adoption, viii. implementation, ix. evaluation, x. alternative models in the study of public policy, xi. future directions.

Policy studies emerged as an important focus in political science in the 1970s. In 1969, David Easton (1969), president of the American Political Science Association, was frustrated with the trend in political science research to study narrow questions that lent themselves to the quantitative methods expected by the behavioral movement. Thus, he called for a postbehavioral revolution where political scientists would study the most important political problems of the day even when quantitative methodologies could not be employed. Easton’s call served as a catalyst for policy research that sought to explain and predict policy patterns as well as to evaluate the relative impact of various types of policy solutions.

This research paper discusses a variety of approaches to the study of public policy and shows how the public administration and public policy subfields are closely related and at times intertwined. At the time of Easton’s call for relevance, the public administration subfield had declined as a prominent subfield in the discipline. The behavioral movement had prevailed in expectations for quantitative research, and public administration had not moved toward a grand theory or wed itself to quantitative methods. However, it had gravitated toward more policy-relevant models and concepts that were important foundations for the emerging field of public policy.

One of the policy subfield’s great advantages for those interested in government and politics is its interdisciplinary and holistic focus. Research is broad ranging and borrows heavily from the work of neighboring subfields and other academic disciplines. This can be found in its use of ideas such as systems theory, plural and elite models, subsystems concepts, and decision-making research.

Over the last four decades, a number of strands of policy research have developed as the subfield has matured. This research paper uses the policy stages framework to organize most of the literature discussed. However, a few of the newer policy frameworks follow this discussion in the alternative models and future directions sections of this research paper.

Policy and administration studies have many areas of overlapping interest. Michael Nelson (1977) suggested that the popularity of policy studies was temporal and it was more a modified version of public administration than a new subfield. A close study shows that the two fields do have substantial overlap, and a review of public administration literature is important to one’s understanding of public policy.

American scholarly attention to public administration dates back to the late 1800s when Woodrow Wilson (1887) wrote his classic essay calling for the development of a career public service. An increase in the professionalism of government administration was necessary to meet the increasing quantity and complexity of government activities. He encouraged comparative study of administration and argued that since administration is distinct from politics, the United States could examine administrative practices of European monarchies without fear of undermining its democratic form of government.

Wilson’s work was written around the same time that the path-breaking German sociologist Max Weber conducted his seminal studies on bureaucracy. Weber (1946) and Wilson (1887) each posited principles of efficiency, centralized authority, hierarchical structures, educated workers, and application of expertise to administration. Weber saw the development of bureaucracy as a natural corollary to modern government and asserted that its rule-driven decisions supported the rule of law and egalitarian values of democracy. The classical model of administration was further developed by scholars who participated in the scientific management and principles schools of administration. Scholars such as Luther Gulick, Frederick Taylor, and Leonard White reinforced the view of bureaucracy as a rational, efficient, hierarchical machine. This paradigm contributed to the sense that administration and policy were conducted in separate spheres and that organizations were controlled by the administrator at the top of the organization’s hierarchy. A careful reading of the early scholars, especially Wilson and Weber, shows that they realized the line between policy and politics was not as distinct as later scholars’ attributions. Wilson (1887) discussed the need for public opinion to be a guide for administrators but also stated that administrators should have some discretionary authority. Weber (1946) cautioned that bureaucrats would use their wealth of information and knowledge to their advantage, observed that bureaucrats were likely to categorize specialized information as official secrets, and warned that an authoritative monarch would be powerless opposite an administrative expert.

By the mid-1900s, many administration scholars challenged the classical model and its primary attention to structure, formal rules, and hierarchy within a single organization. Instead, open-systems scholars discussed the influence of other systems on the political system and how changes in the environment required organizations to adapt. Philip Selznick (1949) in his study, TVA and the Grass Roots, revealed how significantly local grassroots organizations and interests can affect an agency implementing public policy. He showed how organizations have to consider threats from external organizations and interests. One strategy to lessen or neutralize the threat was co-optation. Organizations incorporated dissident parties either formally or informally into their decision-making structures. These representatives provided increased legitimacy by expanding the perspectives that made up the decision-making body. Ideally, the representative also communicated information favorably back to the external group. When necessary, agency officials changed policy requirements to reduce external hostility to their programs. Since these policy changes occurred without participation of elected officials, a more positive view of co-optation suggested that it increased the level of democratic participation at the local level. Selznick’s contributions to an understanding of the important role of external influences, implementation, and intergovernmental complexity have been significant contributions to the study of public policy.

In addition, the open-systems model encouraged thinking about organizations as organisms rather than human machines. Thus, to understand organizations, scholars need to study both formal and informal elements rather than rely on the overwhelming emphasis that the classical model places on formal structures. Chester Barnard (1938) posited that executives and scholars must seek to understand an organization’s people, customs, myths, and values as much as the organization’s structure and rules.

The open-systems model of administration continues to contribute to policy scholarship. It helps to show that policies are not self-implementing and that the administrative variable has an independent impact on the effectiveness of programs. Policy scholars are still coming to terms with the nexus of formal and informal elements of the policy process, and the institutional and constructivist scholars are currently building on the insights of Barnard and others.

As the public policy subfield was developing, it relied heavily on case studies that permitted holistic examination of a single policy. These case studies suggested important generalizations about the policy process that extended the focus of policy scholars to include the examination of the political and administrative processes that preceded and followed formal adoption of policy. Very early in the subfield, a stages heuristic became the dominant model. The stages model typically identified agenda setting, policy formulation, policy adoption, policy implementation, and policy evaluation as the sequential processes of the model (Anderson, 1975; Jones, 1970). Theoretical case studies of the stages contributed to increased understanding of the policy process, especially in the areas of agenda setting, implementation, and evaluation, which had previously received less attention from political scientists than policy formulation and adoption. As useful as the stages heuristic was in organizing the policy subfield, it fell prey to intense criticism for a variety of reasons: no causal theory, insufficient research guidance, too little multistage research, insufficient hypothesis generation, imprecise prediction, and too much linearity (Sabatier, 1991). However, it should be noted that even the scholars who were most closely associated with developing the model clearly indicated that the stages often were not distinct in actual practice and their order and characteristics could be quite varied (Anderson; Jones).

More than four decades later, the stages heuristic continues to anchor a substantial amount of policy research. The processes involved in getting the attention of the government, building coalitions of support, navigating the formal processes of policy adoption, crafting implementation, and modifying the policy over time continue to be essential elements of policy study even for those who are employing other, newer approaches.

Studies of agenda setting have tried to discern why some issues are given serious attention by government and others are not. Even among those that do receive serious attention, the question arises as to why some issues move quickly to reach agenda status and others take much longer. Thus, policy scholars sought to delineate the circumstances that make it more or less likely for a problem to be recognized and attended to by public officials.

Cobb and Elder (1975) observed the variation in the ability of groups to gain access to public officials and argued that this access influenced whether an issue was elevated to the formal agenda of a governmental entity. By the time public policy became a serious subfield, the importance of differential access to public officials had already been explored by the work of Schattschneider (1960). His work drew attention to the uneven participation in governmental decisions. His findings, that business interests and upper classes dominated public policy participation, flew in the face of the traditional pluralists’ claims of policy openness. It also elevated examination of how governmental leaders moved some issues onto the agenda and blocked others. Two years later, another pivotal study added to this point by developing the concept of “nondecisions” and arguing that the blocking of certain issues from advancing onto the agenda is an important type of policy power that needs to be studied even if it is difficult to observe (Bachrach & Baratz, 1962). Bachrach and Baratz assert that disadvantaged groups are less likely to demand change when existing policies benefit widely accepted and powerful interests.

How a problem is defined affects whether and how public officials address it. Schattschneider (1960) was a very early voice in discussing this dimension of the policy process in his delineation of public versus private problems. To gain legitimacy and thereby earn a spot on the agenda, issues needed to be defined as public problems. When issues were judged to be inappropriate for governmental attention, there was little chance that the issue would move beyond a private issue (Eyestone, 1978). Problem-definition research also placed perception and belief systems within the study of policy. Symbolic interactionists in sociology made the foundational contribution to this approach, arguing that human beings act on the basis of meanings they attach to things rather than on factual, objective definitions. This emphasis has found new energy in work by Stone (1988) and more recent scholars using the constructivist approach (Schneider & Sidney, 2009).

The multiple streams model articulated by Kingdon (1984) is sometimes given status as an independent approach to policy studies. It examines three separate streams of activity: problems, policies, and politics. These three dimensions of the policy process progress relatively independently of one another but occasionally couple, usually as a result of a policy entrepreneur who senses the opportunity to connect a problem with a policy proposal. When the political timing is right, the entrepreneur will push the coupled problem and solution through the policy window. Speed is important since the policy window of opportunity usually does not stay open long. Thus, agenda setting is intimately tied to an available solution and a political opportunity. This model is an excellent example of how public administration has contributed to the policy subfield since it is an adaptation of the so-called garbage can model advanced by three public administration scholars in their analysis of organizational processes and choice (Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1972).

Kingdon (1984) heightened the importance of politically capable individuals who he termed policy entrepreneurs. Policy entrepreneurs are opportunists who take advantage of crises or unanticipated events to push their policy proposals. Or they might take advantage of existing coalitions and work to soften up key policy communities. Another strategy is to modify the definition of the problem in order to take advantage of potential support to successfully push the proposal through the window. Ultimately, the entrepreneur is most successful when he or she is able to take advantage of political events or the national mood to promote a good idea that is technically feasible, consistent with core values, fiscally tolerable, and politically acceptable. However, there are many instances where issues fail to achieve or retain agenda status. Reasons for this include financial cost, lack of acceptance by the public or policy elites, opposition of powerful interests, and dominance of other issues (Kingdon).

Policy formulation focuses on the drafting and consideration of proposals by an attentive policy community while policy adoption refers to the passage of the proposal through the formal institutions that have the authority to adopt the policy. This part of the larger policy cycle received the most scholarly attention prior to the development of the policy subfield. It is closely associated with the institutions of government and is typically considered the key decision in the policy process.

In the multiple streams model, it is evident that the first three stages of the policy cycle—agenda setting, formulation, and adoption—take place more or less concurrently. Policy formulation itself focuses on the cognitive analysis and politics of designing a statute or other type of policy decision. The issue of rationality was a major focus of administration scholars in the middle of the 20th century. However, the debate between those arguing for rationality and against it continues. Today, rational choice theorists argue that a rational choice model is the best heuristic for studying, understanding, and predicting the outcomes of policy participants (Ostrom, 2007). The competing view is that scholars need to analyze language and political calculation to better understand the formulation and adoption processes (Allison, 1971; Halperin, 1974; Kingdon, 1984; Schneider & Sidney, 2009; Stone, 1988).

Many models incorporate both rational and political elements. Perhaps this is because the process itself incorporates both rational and political elements. Using a bounded rationality approach, policy analysts develop policy options, predict impacts, and oversee evaluation studies. But on the other side of the equation, political brokers approach the political landscape strategically, using data and analysis as well as other tactics to secure majorities at each stage in the adoption process.

One of the areas of greatest interest to policy scholars is the advocacy and policy design role of executive-legislative-interest group networks. Early scholars of political science advanced a number of models related to interest groups. One of the most noteworthy was David Truman (1951), who concluded that significant interests would organize to influence policies of concern to them. According to Truman and other pluralists, government’s role was often one of facilitating and legitimating group compromise. In addition, pluralists suggested that executive agencies often participated in the bargaining, protecting their interests similar to any other group.

Additional models of executive-legislative-interest group relations preceded the development of the policy subfield and more have been created since. All of these models include groups inside and outside of government and portray coalition formation organizing around a specific policy interest. Numerous terms have been assigned to these models, including iron triangles, subgovernments, policy subsystems, issue networks, policy monopolies, and advocacy coalitions. Each of these versions of policy communities assumes the importance of relationships among actors interested in the policy issue. These models are not exclusively used in the American political context. They have been broadly applied to research in multiple political systems by scholars in many disciplines. In the context of the United States, however, these policy communities thrive in part as a result of the decentralized and fragmented structure of its political institutions. Given the inability of the president and Congress as a whole to be informed and active participants on all issues, those issues that are not receiving widespread public attention and news coverage tend to be left to communities of people who have a deep interest in the specialized policy area.

In the 1960s, these communities were thought to be very stable relationships. In several case studies, the relationships were analyzed to be so stable that they were referred to as iron triangles (Cater, 1959). This conveys a pejorative view of the activity largely because the relationships among the governmental entities in the triangle and the interest groups were characterized as closed. New interests who wanted to communicate a competing set of demands and proposals were not acknowledged. Freeman (1955), in his studies of Indian affairs, showed how these policy subsystems brought stability to a policy area by bridging the executive and legislative branches with key interest groups. Each of these entities needed good relationships with the other two to enhance the likelihood of advancing its institutional and policy goals. This mutual dependence meant that once the subsystem emerged, its accommodations became the basis for determining which issues were placed on the agenda and which ones were not. These patterns of accommodation could be broken up by changes in committee leadership, widespread media attention to an issue in the policy area, or presidential interest. Once the visible interest in the policy topic waned, the subsystem political dynamic was likely to reemerge.

Hugh Heclo (1978) viewed the relationship between policy and administration as a vitally important one, especially as the role of government grew. He suggested that in the search for iron triangles, scholars sought to discover an exceptionally powerful and autonomous executive-legislative-interest group cluster of actors who dominated policy making by policy area. In the process, he believed that policy scholars ignored the more open and more commonly existing webs of people he referred to as issue networks. Issue networks are composed of those who are knowledgeable about the issue in terms of substantive knowledge as well as the history of its policy twists and turns. Policy knowledge is more heavily emphasized in this model, and it is the primary means through which additional participants can join this fluid web of relationships. In addition to being more fluid and episodic than subgovernments, issue networks, as shared-knowledge groups, have more points of view and conflicts than the iron triangle and subsystem frameworks. As aspects of the policy debate change, so do participants in the network. Thus, iron triangles and subsystems may still exist in some policy areas at some points in time, but the more typical pattern is one of a looser, increasingly complex kaleidoscope of policy (Heclo, 1978; Meier, 1985; Sabatier, 1991). For administrators and legislators, it provides a less stable and less predictable arrangement but one that permits greater maneuverability as well since these skilled politicians have the potential to split, expand, and recombine the many segments of the issue network. The irony of the issue network is that, when compared with iron triangles, it expands the number of participants involved, thereby making policymakers contend with more conflict among multiple points of view. It also accepts that involvement in the policy process is contingent on a greater understanding of the increased complexities of the policy area. Heclo (1978) suggests that this pattern of knowledge-based participation may actually increase the cynicism of the general public as the gap between activists and the public expands.

Heclo’s (1978) work was a pivotal change in the subfield’s orientation toward the nature and behavior of policy participants. Since Heclo, numerous scholars have articulated a variety of more diverse webs of policy participants, from Meier’s (1985) regulatory subsystem to Sabatier’s (1988) advocacy coalition framework. In the final analysis, though, whether one uses a looser, more episodic network or a more centralized and stable subsystem, the general public has virtually no role in any of the models. Given the level of specialized learning necessary to truly engage in the conversation among participants in the policy process, the general public’s role is minimal unless the issue somehow ignites widespread interest.

In the early literature on decision making, rationality was elevated to a normative standard. Operations research during World War II contributed to an expectation for clear, measureable objectives, extensive research, and, ideally, evaluation of choices based on evidence. The rational-comprehensive model that emerged ideally required the clarification and prioritizing of objectives, followed by identifying a comprehensive range of options for achieving the ranked objectives, analyzing the capacity of each option to maximize ranked objectives, and choosing the alternative that best achieves the objective at the least cost. This model has continued to retain its normative appeal, but scholars have repeatedly shown that actual decisions are not made this way. Lindblom (1959) argued that the model breaks down in its first step since people find it exceedingly difficult to agree on the relative priorities of values and goals. In the public realm, policymakers must wrestle with conflicting values among the various participants involved. Even the thinking of a single participant often includes conflicting and unresolved priorities among values. Thus, these values are not usually clarified and rank ordered prior to designing a policy. Therefore, policies often embody conflicting values. Lindblom suggested that most policy is made following a process of successive limited comparisons. Analysis is truncated to a few feasible alternatives that are incrementally different from existing practice, and choice is made based on which option receives consensual support. Pluralistic preferences and bargaining processes fit the incremental model well. Furthermore, this model can be expanded to a more intentional and strategic process for achieving substantial change since it is usually easier to achieve several successive incremental changes in policy over several years rather than attempting to secure support for major change in the first instance.

One of the most important contributors to the theories of decision making is Nobel prize winner Herbert Simon (1957). He argued that there are many reasons that rational-comprehensive models are not possible. First, information is lacking and people are not likely to be able to identify all possible alternatives. Second, the ability to accurately predict the outcomes of the many possible alternative choices is unlikely. And third, humans do not have the cognitive capacity to know and remember all that is required by the comprehensive model. Given these limitations, human beings accept what Simon terms satisficing. Under this approach to decision making, it is only necessary to find a solution that meets goals at an acceptable level rather than an optimal level.

Graham Allison’s (1971) classic work analyzing the Cuban missile crisis shows how three different models of decision making each lead to very different explanations of the crisis. His rational actor model can be compared to Simon’s bounded rationality model in that the goal is to choose the alternative that advances the national interest. The rational actor model assumes that nations function as centralized unitary actors where policy choices are made to maximize the national interest. Allison uses chess analogies to emphasize the strategic elements of the choice equation. Thus, the language of the model is of an optimizing effort, but the model recognizes the knowledge limitations and additional uncertainties that constrain choice. The advantages of this model are that it is simplified and stabilizes dramatically the information one needs to make choices. Morton Halperin (1974) emphasizes that given the number of bureaucratic departments and bureaucrats involved in decision making, it is difficult to confirm the unitary actor assumption of the model. The rational actor model assumes that all policymakers agree on the interpretation of the national interest. Halperin argued that this level of unity on what constitutes the national interest is rare in American history. One period followed World War II when the emergence of the cold war and the fear of communism solidified views of the national interest. This type of consensus also emerged for a short period after September 11, 2001.

Allison’s (1971) second model examines governmental decision making as a function of the output of organizations. The organizational process model, which borrows heavily from public administration literature, argues that organizations serve as the primary actors in governmental decision making. Given their hierarchy and centralization, each organization functions in a unified manner alongside other organizations. Under this model, analysts need to consider the outputs of multiple organizations. These outputs are the result of standard operating procedures, and organizational choices are in line with Lindblom’s model of incrementalism. The best predictor for what organizations will produce in the future is to examine the status quo. Importantly, organizational decisions and behaviors are influenced by existing routines and values of the organization.

The third model Allison (1971) advanced was the bureaucratic politics or governmental politics model. This model is probably the one most closely attributed to Allison since it was the most original of the three. Under the governmental politics model, there are numerous individual participants who influence governmental choices and behaviors. Government decisions are more resultants rather than choices since decisions are a combination of actions by numerous participants in the process. Many of the participants become part of the process as a result of an organizational affiliation that they have, and they often take actions based on the values and objectives of their organization using the action channels their organizations provide them. As each of the participants takes actions advancing their personal and organizational interests, they may be involved in overt bargaining with other participants. Equally often, though, participants are inclined to take the actions permitted by their position in the system. The governmental decision is really the interaction and summation of all of these independent decisions rather than coordinated intention. Obviously, this model of decision making is not based on a single set of organizational or national values. Pluralistic values and actions dominate the process.

Just as public administration scholarship was important to the understanding of agenda setting, it also plays a central role in formulation and adoption processes. Both the subsystem and network approaches and the decision-making approaches rely heavily on public administration literature and concepts. The level of bureaucratic participation in policy making becomes even more the focus of policy making in the implementation of public policy.

Implementation includes the administrative activities that convert a statute or other authoritative policy into a functioning program. Traditionally, implementation was characterized as a simple process of following the directives in the statute, administrative rule, executive order, or court ruling. Since early studies assumed that this took place without much delay or discrepancy from the policy’s intent, relatively little attention was paid to this process prior to the emergence of public policy as a subfield.

One study that stands out for being well ahead of the development of the policy subfield was sociologist Phillip Selznick’s (1949) study of the Tennessee Valley Authority. This case study is one of the few studies that provided guidance to the complexity of implementation and the degree to which the contours of a policy could be significantly altered based on the decisions of implementers. Since his study focused on organizations as organic systems that adapt to their external environment, his findings created an awareness of how external forces cause policies adopted in Washington to be altered in the field. Selznick showed how organizations were dependent on local support and how local opposition from powerful groups generated adaptations in policy.

Selznick’s (1949) study also challenged the traditional top-down view of implementation. Under the traditional top-down framework, bureaucrats function as instruments of the policymakers and respond to the command and control of those above them in a process similar to hierarchical lines of authority in a bureaucratic organization. However, scholars soon realized that implementation processes were much more complex and evolutionary than initially thought. Numerous studies showed that implementation was not faithful to the original plan for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, statutes and other formal policies often did not communicate with 100% clarity. There were gaps, overlaps, and contradictions. Thus, even if a bureaucrat was willing to function as a Weberian machine, it was typically the case that bureaucrats had to make significant decisions throughout the process of designing implementation. Even Woodrow Wilson (1887), whose work contributed to the policy–administration dichotomy framework, realized that all administrators operated with some discretion. Although the policy–administration dichotomy was successfully characterized by the public administration literature as unrealistic, policy scholars assumed the concept in their top-down implementation models until sufficient implementation case studies accumulated to convince most that the paradigm was inaccurate. Although there are still a variety of approaches to the study of implementation, most would agree that statutes are altered at least to some extent in the process of implementation. Policies are not self-implementing.

Another complexity in the implementation process that affects whether implemented programs align with statutes is that many national programs are carried out at the state and local levels, which dramatically increases the number of policy actors involved. This increase in the number of decision points creates huge difficulties for timely implementation and necessary communication and coordination. Pressman and Wildvasky (1973) masterfully show that as the number of participants and decision points increase, the likelihood of accurate implementation declines. Two-way interaction models were a reaction to the inadequacies of the top-down models. Bardach (1977) and Lipsky (1979) posit that statutes and other authoritative decisions made by policy-makers interact with decisions of implementers to create the actual policy. As implementers work through the issues of how to carry out the statute, they make choices that modify the policy. In addition, “street level” bureaucrats make use of discretionary authority as they engage in the day-to-day work of public policy. Accepting that implementation is an interactive process rather than a command and control hierarchy dictated by legislators focuses attention on the distance between a policy as originally designed or passed and the policy as implemented.

Majone and Wildavsky (1984) take the interactive model one step further in their work “Implementation as Evolution.” It posits that having the implementing agency modify the original policy design may actually produce beneficial results relative to the original goals of the statute. For example, if the original statute makes assumptions about cause and effect that are inaccurate, then having implementing bureaucrats modify the policy through implementation strategies would be a positive step as long as the changes they are making are in line with a commitment to the objectives and impacts the policy was supposed to produce. Both the implementation as evolution and the other two-way interaction approaches make it obvious how important it is to have agencies that are committed to the policy objectives.

Building on the work of all of these scholars, Mazmanian and Sabatier (1983) develop a synthetic conceptual framework to guide implementation studies as part of the larger policy process. They assert that it is necessary to examine the statute or other formal policy statement to assess its clarity of objectives, accuracy of causal assumptions, and effectiveness of decision rules provided to the implementing agencies. In addition, the researcher must appraise the sufficiency of financial resources, the specificity of the authority relationships, and formal access by outsiders. Variables beyond the statute and outside the implementing agency are also emphasized, including socioeconomic conditions, media attention, public and constituency group support, enthusiasm of higher level public authorities, and the commitment and skill of agency leaders. In addition to internal and external variables, there is also a recognition that implementation success is affected by the difficulty of the problem and the degree of change being sought.

Given the potential for significant adjustments to policy to occur as a result of implementation decisions, a diachronic approach of studying policies over a decade or more is recommended. Without a long-term view, the ability to understand the evolution of policy as it occurs in implementation will be incomplete.

Most stage models of public policy end with evaluation, the systematic assessment of the policy’s impact. Importantly, policies need to be examined for both intended and unintended consequences. Evaluations are completed by the implementers themselves and by external policy analysts. Internal evaluations conducted by the implementing agency have the benefit of getting those who work with the policy on a day-to-day basis to recognize problems and propose solutions. Evaluations by outside analysts tend to bring external perspectives to the process and may possess increased legitimacy from the perspective of elected officials. One trend in the last several decades is for more ideologically affiliated think tanks to publish external policy analyses. These are usually provided with a particular point of view and thus do not necessarily offer the benefits of other external evaluations.

Distinctions should also be made between the evaluation of policy outputs and policy outcomes. Analysis of outputs draws attention to whether the administrative processes are in place through such measures as number and types of clients served. Outcomes refer to whether the policy is achieving desired results on policy goals as well as other unintended impacts.

For policy scholars, impact and outcome studies have received more interest than output studies. Scholars have also sought to understand how policy analysis leads to revisions, transformation, or termination of policies by elected officials. As could be seen in the previous discussion of implementation, revision of policy is often ongoing from the beginning of implementation decisions. However, most stage models have viewed evaluation as isolated from implementation and as more associated with the judgments of policy-impact recommendations for policy revisions. There is a tendency for this stage to look something like the feedback loop of the political systems model.

Systematic policy analysis grew as an important part of the policy process during the 1960s as government attempted to apply economic theory to policy making. Cost–benefit analysis, operations research, and various program performance measures incorporated in budgeting processes were primary tools of the effort. Thus, this part of the policy process is most closely associated with rational models of decision making. It was not unusual for program evaluation and periodic reporting to be statutorily required to assist in legislative oversight and budgeting processes. As the national government expanded the number of large domestic programs, along with detailed prescriptions and administration, collected evidence mounted that the programs were not achieving their lofty goals. Accountability continues as a common refrain today, but the capacity to systematically evaluate programs and to redesign them with effective performance measures has not been as easy or as successful as hoped. Once again, it is possible to see the tension between expectations for rational decision making as the vehicle for better policies and the reality that suggests there are significant human and organizational limitations to rationality. Even when systematic analysis is required, the uncertainty surrounding appropriate measures and the interpretation of results make evaluation as much politics as science.

Deborah Stone (1988), one of the leading critics of rational models of public policy, advanced a concept she termed policy paradox. She argued that politicians typically have dual goals: policy objectives and political objectives. Furthermore, she observed that analysis itself is political since it is rife with framing, definitions, and interpretations. Political participants frequently articulate an argument that on its face appears linear and rational but on closer examination appears constructed to achieve a political purpose. She offered the concept of political reasoning, rather than rational decision making, to understand the struggles of policy communities competing over which ideas, policy definitions, and corresponding solutions will prevail.

A closely related facet of the evaluation literature is the attention given to the use of knowledge generated through policy analysis. Generally, scholars have concluded that knowledge is not the most important dimension of policy decisions. Politics and the limitations of human and organizational capacity intervene (Simon, 1957). Even when decision makers seek information to help make policy, it is frequently questioned, interpreted in different ways, expensive, and incomplete. Although many write very pessimistically about the lack of use of policy knowledge, Carol Weiss (1977) argued that policy knowledge has been successfully used to identify problems, reconsider policy strategies, and provide an enlightenment function. Through the enlightenment process, information accumulates and causes policymakers to redefine the problem, retroactively make sense of why programs did not succeed, or readjust policy objectives to more realistic levels. Finally, policy knowledge is more likely to be used when it is timely and when participants see strategic benefit in doing so.

In 1991, Paul Sabatier criticized the stages heuristic and challenged the field to develop better models. Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993) put forward an alternative heuristic referred to as the advocacy coalition framework. They suggested that the stages model is too simplistic given the number of participants, institutions, and influences in the policy process. In their more complex model, they incorporate governmental and nongovernmental institutions, external conditions and events, and the multiples webs of these entities that align or compete with each other to influence policy. Furthermore, whereas the stages heuristic signals that policy follows a linear process, the advocacy coalition framework sees policies as nonlinear and rarely terminating. Multiple policies affecting the policy domain overlap and affect one another, as do policy implementations at multiple levels of government. Researchers who study a policy arena for several decades will observe policy adaptations and eventually significant change. This occurs because of learning on the part of the participant coalitions that may compete over preferences based on different resources and belief systems. However, the advocacy coalition framework posits that the most substantial changes in policy are more likely to come from external events and conditions than from policy learning. To be able to witness this, scholars must be prepared to follow a policy area for several decades since advocacy coalitions tend to be relatively stable. Some scholars (Lester & Stewart, 2000) see the advocacy coalition framework as a development within evaluation research that could be incorporated within the stages model, but Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993) claim that the model provides an important and enhanced alternative model.

Another model of note is the punctuated-equilibrium framework (Baumgartner & Jones, 1993). This model is similar to the advocacy coalition model in terms of the need to look at policy over long periods of time since most policy follows incremental change and relatively stable patterns over many years before incurring major change. Major punctuations occur in the context of changed beliefs among the policy community and often a new venue for implementation. Once implemented, equilibrium is reestablished, and the policy arena goes back to a lengthy period of stability. The punctuated-equilibrium model also draws attention to the importance of institutions since they tend to help ingrain the results of the dominant coalition and to resist pressures for change.

Elinor Ostrom (2007) and many others articulate a preference for a model of institutional rational choice. This model builds on the discipline’s traditional emphasis on institutional structures and rules. Ostrom argued that institutions should be defined as rules, norms, and strategies that characterize entities with repeated processes. Rules dictate who has advantages in the pursuit of policy preferences and frequently determine who the major players are in the policy. This model also examines the hierarchical ordering of rules. Thus, constitutional rules influence options for players at other levels of policy choice all the way down to the operational, day-to-day decisions of policy actors. Rules can take the form of formal, written provisions or can be norms based on shared understandings by participants or guides that individuals develop to direct their own behaviors. These working rules help to provide stability in the midst of uncertainty. Once the study of levels and types of rules is achieved, the researcher can make probabilistic predictions using rational choice analysis. This model brings attention back to the formal versus informal distinction that was made by administration scholars many decades earlier.

One must ask whether any of the models will rise to a position of dominance in the near future. Given that scholars agree that the policy process is complex and patterns of human behavior are varied, the search for a dominant, robust, parsimonious model is unlikely to be successful. This effort is also exacerbated by the number of contributing disciplines to the subfield. Frustration over this situation is also likely to continue. Perhaps Kenneth Meier (2009) captures it best when he complains that there are so many models, their ability to guide research is analogous to the interstate highway system’s ability to guide a vacation. A more positive point of view may come from the realization that there is a lot of overlap among the various models. For example, the advocacy coalition framework, stages framework, punctuated equilibria model, and the institutional rational choice model all describe the importance of institutional structures, political brokers, external influences, and shared meanings.

Looking at policy processes more holistically and studying policies over the long term to incorporate evolution and change are recent trends in policy research that are likely to continue in the future. The role of beliefs and the processes leading to shared meanings also appear to be increasing in importance (Schneider & Ingram, 1997). It remains to be seen whether future studies integrate policy and public administration models. The literature of the two subfields has numerous parallels. Very few policies can be implemented without the significant involvement of an administrative system. The fact that the same policy can produce such different results across different implementing subunits (e.g., states, counties, or schools) suggests that agencies and individuals make a huge difference. Leadership styles and administrative cultures may offer vital insight to explaining the variation (Hicklin & Godwin, 2009; Robichau & Lynn, 2009).

Given the large number of models and participating disciplines, the methodologies employed in the subfield will continue to range from qualitative to quantitative. The quantitative methods employed in large-N comparative studies and some evaluation studies are likely to continue, as are the more qualitative methods of case studies and language analysis approaches. This is not necessarily a negative. As Easton (1969) argued in his call for a postbehavioral revolution, the important objective is to be relevant even if it means sacrificing the quantitative methods called for in the behavioral movement. Thus, a mixture of quantitative and qualitative measures is likely to continue to characterize the policy subfield.

Bibliography:

  • Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis. Boston: Little, Brown.
  • Anderson, J. (1975). Public policy making. New York: Praeger. Bachrach, P. S., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56, 947-952.
  • Bardach, E. (1977). The implementation game. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Barnard, C. I. (1938). Functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Baumgartner, B. D., & Jones, F. R. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Cater, D. (1959). The fourth branch of government. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Cobb, R. W., & Elder, C. D. (1975). Issue creation and agenda building. In J. Anderson (Ed.), Cases in public policy making (pp. 10 21). New York: Praeger.
  • Cohen, M., March, J., & Olsen, J. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25.
  • Easton, D. (1953). The political system. New York: Knopf. Easton, D. (1969). The new revolution in political science. American Political Science Review, 63, 1051-1061.
  • Eyestone, R. (1978). From social issues to public policy. New York: Wiley.
  • Freeman, J. L. (1955). The political process: Executive bureau legislative committee relations. New York: Random House.
  • Gulick, L., & Urwick, L. (Eds). (1937). Papers on the science of administration. New York: Institute of Public Administration.
  • Halperin, M. H. (1974). Bureaucratic politics and foreign policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  • Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The new American political system (pp. 87-124). Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
  • Hicklin, A., & Godwin, E. (2009). Agents of change: The role of public managers in public policy. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 13-20.
  • Jones, C. O. (1970). An introduction to the study of public policy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  • Kingdon, J.W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
  • Lester, J. P., & Stewart, J. (2000). Public policy: An evolutionary approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  • Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, 19, 78-88.
  • Lipsky, M. (1979). Street level bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Majone, G., & Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation as evolution. In J. L. Pressman & A. Wildavsky (Eds.), Implementation (3rd ed., pp. 163-180). Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Mazmanian, D. H., & Sabatier, P. A. (1983). Implementation and public policy. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
  • Meier, K. J. (1985). Regulation: Politics, bureaucracy & economics. New York: St. Martin’s.
  • Meier, K. J. (2009). Policy theory, policy theory everywhere: Ravings of a deranged policy scholar. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 5-12.
  • Nelson, M. (1977, September). What’s wrong with political science? Washington Monthly, 9(7), 12-20.
  • Ostrom, E. (2007). Institutional rational choice. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 21-64). Boulder: CO: Westview Press.
  • Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Ranney, A. (1968). The study of policy content: A framework of choice. In A. Ranney (Ed.), Political science and public policy (pp. 3 21). Chicago: Markham.
  • Rivlin, A. M. (1971). Systematic thinking for social action. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  • Robichau, R. W., & Lynn, L. E., Jr. (2009). The implementation of public policy: Still the missing link. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 21-36.
  • Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2), 129-168.
  • Sabatier, P. A. (1991, June). Political science and public policy. PS: Political Science & Politics, 24(2), 143-147.
  • Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins Smith, H. C. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  • Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1997). Social constructions in the study of public policy. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 189-211). New York: Guilford Press.
  • Schneider, A., & Sidney, M. (2009). What is next for policy design and social construction theory? Policy Studies Journal, 37, 103-120.
  • Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Simon,H. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. New York: Wiley.
  • Stone, D.A. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
  • Taylor, FW. (1911). Scientific management. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Truman, D. (1951). The governmental process. New York: Knopf.
  • Weber, M. (1946). Bureaucracy. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds. & Trans.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Weiss, C. H. (1977). Research for policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3, 531-546.
  • White, L. D. (1926). Introduction to the study of public administration. New York: Macmillan.
  • Wilson, W. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2(2), 197-222.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

examples of political science research papers

IMAGES

  1. 🌱 Example of a political science research paper. Free Political Science

    examples of political science research papers

  2. Essay: Political Analysis: Research Design and Data Analysis Second

    examples of political science research papers

  3. Writing About Political Science

    examples of political science research papers

  4. Political Science Paper Sample

    examples of political science research papers

  5. Writing A Political Science Essay

    examples of political science research papers

  6. College essay: Political science quantitative research paper

    examples of political science research papers

VIDEO

  1. Political Science 10+2

  2. POLITICAL SCIENCE

  3. B.A political science paper:c-1(understanding political theory)2022

  4. #politicalscience #online #advance #level

  5. M.A. POLITICAL SCIENCE

  6. M.A. POLITICAL SCIENCE

COMMENTS

  1. Political Science Research Paper

    For example, during the years in which traditionalism was the prevailing research approach within political science, Woodrow Wilson (1911) delivered an address to the American Political Science Association (APSA) that called into dispute various claims made by previous APSA president James Bryce.

  2. Political Science

    What this handout is about This handout will help you to recognize and to follow writing standards in political science. The first step toward accomplishing this goal is to develop a basic understanding of political science and the kind of work political scientists do. Defining politics and political science

  3. PDF A Guide to Developing and Writing Research Papers in Political Science

    The Six Parts of a Research Paper. A research paper in political science typically has 6 parts: (1) Introduction, (2) Literature review, (3) Theory, (4) Research Design, (5) Analysis, and (6) Conclusion/ Discussion. While papers do vary in their construction, that variation usually finds a way to embrace these 6 parts.

  4. Writing a Political Science Research Paper

    Political Science students are asked to write a number of different kinds of papers, including reaction papers, compare and contrast essays, close reading/textual analysis papers, and synoptic papers. The research paper is thus only one type of political science paper. It is, however, a type that has quite specific components and requirements.

  5. PDF Writing in Political Science

    In the United States, political science is generally divided into four main fields: American politics, comparative politics, international relations, and political theory/philosophy. Increasingly, some political scientists focus exclusively on research methodologies.

  6. Award Winning Theses

    Undergraduate Honors Thesis Award Winning Theses Award Winning Theses The following theses are recent examples of outstanding work: Avery Goods: "An Inconvenient Group: The Effect of Motivated Messages on Climate Change Attitudes and Behaviors of Skeptic Audiences" 2019 Janda Prize Winner for Best Honors Thesis

  7. PDF GUIDE TO POLITICAL SCIENCE RESEARCH

    And Benefits of Research • Work on the cutting edge of Political Science, advance the field, and expand humanity's body of knowledge on political subjects Gain skills for a resume like problem-solving and qualitative and/or quantitative data analy-sis

  8. PDF Writing for Political Science

    For example: The attempt to industrialize in the Global South has meant that countries have gotten into more debt than they can pay off. This thesis statement is too general - it doesn't specify which countries, or over what time period. A better thesis statement is more specific and shapes the argument to come:

  9. Political Science Subject Guide: Literature Reviews

    1. Use this guide as a starting point. Begin your search with the resources linked from the political science subject guide. These library catalogs and databases will help you identify what's been published on your topic. 2. What came first? Try bibliographic tracing. As you're finding sources, pay attention to what and whom these authors cite.

  10. POLSC101: Research in Political Science

    Writing political science research papers. ... 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 proper ...

  11. LibGuides: Political Science: Research Methods & Design

    It covers the entire research process including: formulating research questions; sampling (probability and nonprobability); measurement (surveys, scaling, qualitative, unobtrusive); research design (experimental and quasi-experimental); data analysis; and, writing the research paper.

  12. Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

    Even students capable of writing excellent essays still find their first major political science research paper an intimidating experience. Crafting the right research question, finding good sources, properly summarizing them, operationalizing concepts and designing good tests for their hypotheses, presenting and analyzing quantitative as well as qualitative data are all tough-going without a ...

  13. An Open Collection of Political Science Research with OLS Models and

    To provide material for accessible examples and replication exercises in undergraduate and introductory graduate research methods courses, I created an open repository of published research in political science with cross-sectional data and an OLS model. The collection reduces the cost of searching for published work that matches the material ...

  14. Political Science Research and Methods

    Political Science Research and Methods (PSRM) is a general political science journal dedicated to publishing original scholarly work of the highest quality from all subfields of political science.The journal specifically focuses on research applying rigorous methods to empirical or theoretical problems and promotes a rigorous scientific approach to the study of politics.

  15. 800 Political Science Research Paper Topics

    800 Political Science Research Paper Topics. Political science is a dynamic field that offers a multitude of avenues for exploration and inquiry. Whether you are passionate about the intricacies of American politics, fascinated by global affairs, or interested in the intersection of politics with social issues, there's a wealth of research ...

  16. Political Science Department Masters Theses Collection

    Amin: his seizure and rule in Uganda., James Francis Hanlon, Political Science. PDF. The politics of education : a case study of personnel policy making., Marilee Hartley, Political Science. PDF. Manpower programs : government's response to the occupational needs of the poor., Philip D. Lerner, Political Science. PDF

  17. Search Examples & TIPS

    The examples below are provided to support the information provided and practice searches used during the LIBBI session. Use the links below to review the sample search strategies and evaluate the lists of search results. Search, then tweak and edit the terms, search fields, subjects, databases, etc. to match your sr. paper research needs.

  18. Political Science Research Paper Examples

    We have collected almost 100 example papers on the most important political science research paper topics. This collection of political science research paper examples highlights the most important topics, issues, questions, and debates that any student obtaining a degree in this field ought to have mastered.

  19. Political Science Research Topics

    In this article, we will show you ten examples of political science research topics for bachelor's degree students. We also show you how to craft political science research questions that work. With this list of currently relevant political science research paper topics, you can be sure you'll work on something meaningful and relevant.

  20. 100+ Research Topics In Politics (+ Free Webinar)

    Public policy Examples of politics-related dissertations Topics & Ideas: Political Theory An analysis of the impact of feminism on political theory and the concept of citizenship in Saudi Arabia in the context of Vision 2030 A comparative study of the political philosophies of Marxism and liberalism and their influence on modern politics

  21. 100 Political Science Research Topics in 2024

    Practical examples may include domestic politics, institutions analysis, and diverse conflicts related to domestic or international issues. When choosing such topic, it's necessary to focus not on study object per se, but on method that is implemented for particular political science issue analysis.

  22. Political Science: Scientific Trends

    Vineeta Yadav, Religious Parties and the Politics of Civil Liberties New York: Oxford University Press, 2021. 384p. $86.00 cloth. Politics and Religion. » See more recent papers. Ad. 0.68417000770569. Find research trends based on altmetric published in peer-reviewed Political Science journals.

  23. Public Policy Research Paper

    Browse other research paper examples and check the list of political science research paper topics for more inspiration. If you need a research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A!

  24. Structure of Research Article Abstracts in Political Science: A Genre

    The "Discussion" move includes "optional" concluding "step" that states implications and suggestions for further research. Successful political science RA abstracts may include one of the following three-move patterns (a) I-P-M-R-D, (b) I-P-M-R, or (c) I-P-R-D as they occurred in more than 50% of the investigated political science ...