Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Experimental Methodology in Political Science

  • Rose McDermott (a1)

Experiments offer a useful methodological tool to examine issues of importance to political scientists. The historical and cultural differences between experiments in behavioral economics and social psychology are discussed. Issues of central concern to experimentalists are covered, including impact versus control, mundane versus experimental realism, internal versus external validity, deception, and laboratory versus field experiments. Advantages and disadvantages of experimentation are summarized.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

J.Adair , T.Dushenki , and R.Lindsay 1985. “Ethical Regulations and Their Impact on Research Practice.” American Psychologist 40:5972.

T.Brock , and L.Becker 1966. “‘Debriefing’ and Susceptibility to Subsequent Experimental Manipulation.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2:314323.

S.Fillenbaum 1966. “Prior Deception and Subsequent Experimental Performance: The ‘Faithful’ Subject.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4:532537.

S.Smith , and D.Richardson 1983. “Amelioration of Deception and Harm in Psychological Research: The Important Role of Debriefing.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44:10751082.

L.Striker , S.Messick , and D.Jackson 1969. “Evaluating Deception in Psychological Research.” Psychological Bulletin 71:343351.

T.Walker 1976. “Microanalytic Approaches to Political Decision-Making.” American Behavioral Science 20:93110.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *