Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-21T16:13:27.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction to Field Experiments: Thinking Through Identity and Positionality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2022

Justine Davis
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, USA
Kristin Michelitch
Affiliation:
Toulouse School of Economics, France

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Field Experiments: Thinking Through Identity and Positionality
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Cilliers, Jacobus, Dube, Oeindrila, and Siddiqi, Bilal. 2015. “The White-Man Effect: How Foreigner Presence Affects Behavior in Experiments.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 118:397414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Justine M. 2020. “Manipulating Africa? Perspectives on the Experimental Method in the Study of African Politics.” African Affairs 119 (476): 452–67.Google Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2017. Relational Interviewing: An Interpretive Approach to Social Science Research. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., and Green, Donald P.. 2012. Field Experiments: Design, Analysis, and Interpretation. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Henry, Marsha, Higate, Paul, and Sanghera, Gurchathen. 2009. “Positionality and Power: The Politics of Peacekeeping Research.” International Peacekeeping 16 (4): 467–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, Macartan. 2015. “Reflections on the Ethics of Social Experimentation.” Journal of Globalization and Development 6 (1): 87112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupu, Noam, and Michelitch, Kristin. 2018. “Advances in Survey Methods for the Developing World.” Annual Review of Political Science 21:195214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelitch, Kristin. 2018. “Whose Research Is It? Political Scientists Discuss Whether, How, and Why We Should Involve the Communities We Study.” PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (3): 543–45. DOI:10.1017/S1049096518000422.Google Scholar
Soedirgo, Jessica, and Glas, Aarie. 2020. “Toward Active Reflexivity: Positionality and Practice in the Production of Knowledge.” PS: Political Science & Politics 53 (3): 527–31.Google Scholar
Yanow, Dvora, and Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine. 2015. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Davis and Michelitch supplementary material

Davis and Michelitch supplementary material

Download Davis and Michelitch supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 102.8 KB