Methodology in politics dissertations; the case study of faculty of World Studies’ dissertations

Document Type : Science - Research (Political Science)

Author
Reza Bagheri
Faculty member of Tehran University
10.30497/pk.2020.2684
Abstract
Some students may think that method section/chapter is not very important because in this chapter some anthological, epistemological and methodological accounts repeatedly will be discussed. However, among academics the methodology section/chapter is one of the most important section of a research. One of the main reasons to put ‘research method’ section or chapter in dissertations or articles is to achieve ‘replicability’, ‘transparency’ and ‘validity’ in empirical studies. This chapter/section needs to outline several issues such as research design, sampling approach, access, the nature of applied method such as interview or observation, coding frame, and analyzing method (Bryman 2012: 687). If the research method is not fully and appropriately clarified, the findings of research can be easily questioned or dismissed. This paper, with the general aim of exploring some aspects of ‘research methods in dissertations’ especially in political science and international relations, in a case study, examines the ‘methodology section or chapter’ in faculty of World Studies’ dissertations in the University of Tehran. This paper also is designed to examine the extent in which students tend to use empirical studies. In doing so, this paper by using quantitative content analysis, selected 137 master and PhD dissertations (out of 453) from different groups, languages and years to examine their tendencies towards empirical researches. Based on four key and common elements of research method section: the data collection procedures, study design, selection of participants, and the planned data analysis or analytic strategy (Fox and Jennings 2014: 137) it assesses how students clarify their research methods and how they applied these methods in practice. The findings of this research shows that 26 per cent of dissertations were carried out using empirical research methods which in comparison with previous figures, around 6 per cent (Delavari 1385: 118) and around 12 per cent (Seyed Emami 1389: 145), is a good achievement.
Keywords
Content Analysis
Critical Theory
Empirical Studies
Faculty of World Studies
Interpretivisim
Positivism
Research Method
Subjects
افتخاری، قاسم (1385). «بررسی روش‌شناختی پایان‌نامه‌های دوره دکتری علوم سیاسی و روابط بین‌الملل دانشگاه تهران»، پژوهشنامه علوم سیاسی، 1(5)، 21-1.
حاجی یوسفی، امیرمحمد و طالبی، معصومه (1390). «مسئله و روش پژوهش در پایان‌نامه‌های علوم سیاسی و روابط بین‌الملل دانشگاه شهید بهشتی»، رهیافت‌های سیاسی و بین‌المللی، 6(26)، 216-199.
حقیقت، سیدصادق (1382). «بحران روش‌شناسی در علوم سیاسی»، علوم سیاسی. 6(22)، 174-153.
دلاوری، ابوالفضل (1385). «ویژگی‌ها و گرایش‌های علوم سیاسی در ایران: نگاهی از دریچه نشریات تخصصی این رشته»، پژوهشنامه علوم سیاسی. 1(5)، 120-95.
سیدامامی، کاووس (1387). پژوهش در علوم سیاسی؛ رویکردهای اثبات‌گرا، تفسیری و انتقادی. تهران: پژوهشکده مطالعات فرهنگی و اجتماعی و انتشارات دانشگاه امام صادق (علیه‌السلام).
سیدامامی، کاووس (1389). «جای خالی پژوهش‌های تجربی در علوم سیاسی ایران»، پژوهشنامه علوم سیاسی. 2(5)، 162-143.
کریپندورف، کلوس (1383). تحلیل محتوا: مبانی روش‌شناسی (هوشنگ نایبی، مترجم)، تهران: نشر نی.
ون‌دایک، تئون ای. (1382). مطالعاتی در تحلیل گفتمان: از دستور متن تا گفتمان کاوی انتقادی (ترجمه گروه مترجمان)، تهران: مرکز مطالعات و تحقیقات رسانه‌ها.
ویلر، دیوید و ویلر، جودیت (1380). تجربه‌گرایی در جامعه‌شناسی (حسن شمس‌آوری، مترجم)، تهران: نشر مرکز.
هولستی، اُل. آر (1380). تحلیل محتوا در علوم اجتماعی (نادر سالارزاده امیری، مترجم). تهران: دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی.
 
Agar, Michael (1980). The Professional Stranger: an Informal Introduction to Ethnography. London: Academic Press.
Baxter, Pamela and Jack, Susan (2008). "Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers", The Qualitative Report. 13(4), 544-559.
Blaikie, Norman (2000). Designing Social Research. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bryman, Alan (2012). Social Research Method. 4th Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
De Vaus, D. (2002). Surveys in Social Research. (5th Ed), London: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fetterman, D. (1989). Ethnography: Step by Step. London: Sage Publication.
Fox, Bryanna and Jennings, Wesley (2014). "How to Write a Methodology and Results Section for Empirical Research", Journal of Criminal Justice Education. 25(2), 137-156.
Giddens, Anthony (2009). Sociology. 6th Edition, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Lewis, Jane and Ritchie, Jane (2003). "Generalising from Qualitative Research", In Ritchie, Jane and Lewis, Jane (eds.), Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers (263-286). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Neuman, L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Potter, Jonathan (1997). "Discourse Analysis as a Way of Analysing Naturally Occurring Talk", In: D. Silverman (ed.) Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice. London: Sage.
Rubin, H. J. (1995). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. London: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research; Design and Methods. London: Sage.
Journal of Political Knowledge
Volume 16, Issue 1 - Serial Number 31
ESSAY
April 2020
Pages 67-90

  • Receive Date 14 November 2019
  • Revise Date 14 January 2020
  • Accept Date 28 December 2019