Testing Theories and Testing Hypotheses

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Theories
Asking Good Questions
Forming Hypotheses
Types of Evidence
Testing Hypotheses
Thinking Comparatively and Making Arguments
Critiques and Challenges of Measurement
Judeo-Christian Perspectives
References

Theories

Just as in empirical sciences, social sciences such as political science have theories. These are broad but accurate and consistent explanations of phenomena and events in the world and society. Theories are not predictions but explanations that must be supported by overwhelming evidence. The normative theory deals with aspects of value and morals, while empirical theories focus on the factors and variables causing an outcome. There are instances where theories may not hold up, particularly in such unpredictable areas as social sciences, but they generally hold true. This paper will focus on the methodology of proving the theorem that individual liberty is likely to lead to increased wealth in a body politic.

Asking Good Questions

Asking questions is the quintessential begging of the research and inquiry process, particularly in such a broad field as comparative politics. As discussed in previous chapters, since there are so many perspectives and concepts to each given topic, asking the right questions can help narrow the research scope and make it more valid to answer the relevant questions and prove the theory at hand. Here are two examples of potential questions that should be clarified both for the research process and the inquiry itself.

Forming Hypotheses

Prior to beginning the research, it is necessary to form a hypothesis based on the theory at hand. A hypothesis is formed through deduction which is taking a broad idea and testing it on specific examples. Induction, which is taking data and specific observations to test a general claim, is not appropriate. Therefore, in the example given, the hypothesis is that participation in free markets provides wealth in democracies; it is an observable implication that can be tested and compared among nations to identify whether it is true.

Types of Evidence

Evidence is vital to proving hypotheses and arriving at conclusions that contribute to theory. In the case of examining the theory of democracy and wealth, qualitative data will have to be collected on how countries transitioning to democracy saw an increase in wealth due to the adoption of free markets commonly associated with this political system. In turn, quantitative data is used to supplement with numerical statistics such as GDP growth, median income, or GINI index in comparison to non-democratic states over a certain period.

Testing Hypotheses

In testing hypotheses, correlation is one of the primary methods in determining the relationship. It helps measure the direct association between variables, finding a positive or negative correlation, which then leads to certain conclusions. So in testing, wealth and democracy of nations are typically positively correlated; making the connection between these two variables is part of the hypothesis testing.

Establishing a causal relationship follows in the aftermath of determining a correlation because a correlation in itself between said democracy and wealth is not proof. It may be that a correlation exists without causation due to chance, but that is rare, so there is a factor that would result in both. In comparative politics, it is determined that countries are to become democratic for a specific reason, and the causal relationship seeks to determine that.

Thinking Comparatively and Making Arguments

Once the research is complete, the collected information and data should be analyzed and formed into a cohesive and comprehensive argument. The meaningful claims should aim to contribute to new knowledge in an original way without simply rephrasing previous research. As comparative politics includes a broad range of factors influencing a phenomenon, an argument can be creatively modified to create the necessary justifications.

Finalizing the argument and its presentation is important. In a combination of logic, evidence, and previous research – a good inquiry finishes with a strong argumentative discussion of the hypothesis and implications for the theory. Comparative research typically has multiple variables to consider and have an impact on the final outcome, so the researcher must present this in a manner that is argumentative and contributes to new knowledge rather than listing facts.

Critiques and Challenges of Measurement

Social science is rarely straightforward and varies abstractly from case to case. Researchers can identify general patterns, but there are always likely to be outliers due to human nature and society, but this can be used to improve theory and interpretation. Evidence is a fickle aspect; in social science, there are heavy biases toward preferencing one idea over another or measurement bias (i.e., GDP is considered by many an inaccurate representation of true national wealth).

Judeo-Christian Perspectives

Democracy and wealth and the investigation of comparative politics of the subject may seem far removed from religion, but in fact, everything is touched and influenced by God in what is known as the Holy Commonwealth, a covenantal order. It is not known how or why, but elements of politics, civics, and economics are influenced by God. Potentially, by guiding nations to democracy, He seeks prosperity and for the people, especially the faithful, as Democracy is also associated with freedom of religion, while non-democratic states often pursue a secular and anti-Christian agenda. The Judeo-Christian perspective recognizes while the political economics of democracy and wealth growth is a contractual order between men, there is the presence of God in the context.

References

Dickovick, J. Tyler, and Jonathan Eastwood. 2019. Comparative Politics (3^rd ed.). New York, NY.: Oxford University Press Academic US.

Fischer, Ronald, and Ype H. Poortinga. 2018. “Addressing Methodological Challenges in Culture-Comparative Research.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 49 (5): 691–712. Web.

Kesselman, Mark, Joel Krieger, and William A. Joseph. 2018. Introduction to Comparative Politics: Political Challenges and Changing Agendas. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.

Martin, Glenn R. 2006. Prevailing Worldviews of Western Society Since 1500. Marion, IN: Triangle Publishing.

Simmons, Erica S., and Nicholas Rush Smith. 2021. Rethinking comparison. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press

Click Here To Order Now!