Předmět Masterś Thesis Seminar II. (JPM603)

Na serveru studentino.cz naleznete nejrůznější studijní materiály: zápisky z přednášek nebo cvičení, vzorové testy, seminární práce, domácí úkoly a další z předmětu JPM603 - Masterś Thesis Seminar II., Fakulta sociálních věd, Univerzita Karlova v Praze (UK).

Materiál	Typ	Datum	Počet stažení

Cíl

 Master Thesis Seminar II. builds on the MT I. seminar and is intended for students preparing their master thesis. Therefore, it is expected, that participants have well-developed idea of their master thesis topic and general research questions. The aim of this course is to sharpen these research questions and to polish methodological aspects of students´ work. We will discuss some advanced methodological issues in the course of the semester and students are expected to participate actively. MT II. seminar provides an opportunity to discuss specific problems of students´ works (problems with deduction of hypothesis, problems with measurement and operationalization, issues of epistemological choices and namely problems with research-question framing etc.). At the end of the semester, students should polish and finalize methodological chapter of their master theses. Requirements: (i) Active participation (ii) Presentation of a methodological problem related to a student’s thesis (12-15 minutes) (iii) Short review on a methodological book or article (related to the master thesis) - 2-4 000 words. (iv) Outline of a methodological chapter of the master thesis by the end of the semester. 

Sylabus

Generally, we will discuss several key topics of qualitative and quantitative research. Further we will focus on the possibility of intercommunication between quantitative and qualitative research.  1) Introduction, organization of the seminar, requirements etc. Block one: qualitative methods2) Plausibility probe, Most likely, least likely and crucial case3) Pattern matching, Congruence, Process tracing4) Most similar and different cases, or Mills methods, selection on the extreme values, counterfactuals. Block two: multi-method research5) Multi-method research (questions of comparability and translatability)6) Path-way case; parallel research7) Measurement - quantitative and qualitative approach Block three: Quantitative research - will be taught only if there is a significant number of students pursuing quantitative research8) Quantitative research, χ-test of good fit, ANOVA etc.9) Quantitative research, regressions - OLS and its variants Block four: concept formation10) Formation of concepts in qualitative studies11) Formation of concepts in quantitative studies  12) Presentations of student’s projects 

Literatura

Useful literature dealing with qualitative and multi-method research and philosophy of the social sciences. BENNETT, A., ELMAN, C. (2007): Case study methods in the international relations subfield  Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 40, 2, pp. 170-194BENNETT, A., ELMAN, C. (2006): Complex Causal Relationship and Case Study Methods: The Example of Path Dependence, Political Analysis, 14, s. 250-267.BRAUMOELLER, B., GOERTZ, G. (2000): The methodology of necessary conditions. American Journal of Political Science, 44, č. 4, s. 844-858.CHALMERS, A. (1999): What is the Think Called Science. Hackett Publishing Co.; 3 edition, Indianapolis, 200 s.COLLIER, D. (2011): Understanding Process Tracing. PS Political science and politics, 44, č. 4, s. 823-830.ELMAN, C. (2005): Explanatory Typologies in Qualitative Studies of International Politics. International Organization, 59, č. 2, s. 293-326.Fearon, J. (1991): Counterfactuals and hypothesis testing. World Politics, 43, č. 2, s. 169-195.Flyvbjerg, B. (2006): Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, č. 2, s. 219-245.George, A., Bennett, A. (2005): Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, 350 s.GERRING, J. (1999): What Makes a Concept Good? An Integrated Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Sciences. Polity31, č. 3, s. 357-393.GERRING, J. (2004): What is a Case Study and What is it Good For? American Political Science Review, 98, č. 2, s. 341-354.Gerring, J. (2006): Single Outcome Studies, A Methodological Primer, International Sociology, vol. 21, no. 5, s. 707-734.Gerring, J. (2007): Is There a (Viable) Crucial-Case Method? Comparative Political Studies 40, č. 3, s. 231-53.GERRING, J., MCDERMOTT, R. (2007): An Experimental Template for Case Study Research, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 51, No.3, s. 688-701.Gerring, J., Seawright, J. (2008): Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research, A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly, 61, no. 2, s. 294-308.GERRING, J. (2010): Causal Mechanisms: Yes, But…, Comparative Political Studies, vol. 43, no. 11, s. 1499-1526.GERRING, J. (2012a): Mere Description. British Journal of Political Science , forthcomming, 32 s.Grynaviski, E. (2012): Contrasts, conterfactuals and causes. European Journal of International Relations, 0(0) forthcomming - s. 1-24.KING, G., KEOHANE, R., VERBA, S. (1994): Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 300 s.KOŘAN, M. (2009): Jakou cestou po pozitivismu? Pragmatismus a vědecký realismus a jejich role ve výzkumu mezinárodních vztahů. Mezinárodní vztahy, č. 1, s. 7-36.Levy, J. (2008a): Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25, č. 1, s. 1-18.LEVY, J. (2008b): Counterfactuals and Case Studies. In: Steffensmeier, J., Brady, H., Collier, D. (eds). Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford University Press, New York, s. 627-644.LIEBERMAN, A. (2005): American Political Science Review, 99, č. 3, s. 435-452.Lijphart, A. (1971): Comparative Politics and Comparative Method. The American Political Science Review, 65, č. 3, s. 682-693.MACDONALD, P. (2003): Useful Fiction or Miracle Maker: The Competing Epistemological Foundations of Rational Choice Theory. American Political Science Review, 97, č. 4, s. 551-565.MAHONEY, J. (2000): Path Dependence in Historical Sociology. Theory and Society, 29, č. 4, s. 507-548.MAHONEY, J. (2010): After KKV, The New Methodology of Qualitative Research, World Politics, Vol. 62, 1. s. 120-147.MAHONEY, J., GOERTZ, D. (2004): The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Comparative Research. American Political Science Review, 98, č. 4, s. 653-669.Monteiro, N., Ruby, K. (2009): IR and the False Promise of Philosophical Foundations, International Theory, 1, č. 1, s. 15-48.RAGIN, C. (1987): Comparative Method, Moving Beyond Qualitative and Qantitative research, University of California Press, Los Angeles, 218 s.RAGIN, C. (2008): Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. University Of Chicago Press, Chicago, 240 s.RUZZENE, A. (2012): Drawing Lessons from Case Studies by Enhancing Comparability. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 42, č. 1, s. 99-120.Sayer, A. (1992): Method in Social Science. Routledge, London, 313 s.Sayer, A. (2000): Realism and Social Science. Sage Publications, London, 224 s.

Garant

RNDr. Jan Kofroň, Ph.D.