I am the white whale, the ghost of Christmas past, and I have come to take your soul to FAO Schwartz.
Political Science Job Rumors » General Job Market Discussion » Methodology/Theory Debates
Qualitative methods
(6278 posts)-
Posted 1 month ago #
-
This post is a Hebrew year that started in the evening before September 28, 1992, and ended on September 15, 1993. It is a common year in the Hebrew Metonic cycle, with a single Adar month. It is the sixth year after a Shmita year.
Posted 1 month ago # -
I don't believe it.
Posted 1 month ago # -
quant v. qual, it is all explained by Tajfel and Turner and the minimum group paradigm.
Posted 1 month ago # -
If so, then discussing the fact that Herbert praises quantitative methods in gauging human cognition is most certainly relevant to this thread.
The study cited by Herbert does not gauge human cognition.
Posted 1 month ago # -
This post is a Hebrew year that started in the evening before September 28, 1992, and ended on September 15, 1993. It is a common year in the Hebrew Metonic cycle, with a single Adar month. It is the sixth year after a Shmita year.
תשנ"ג
Posted 1 month ago # -
"The study cited by Herbert does not gauge human cognition. "
So people's attitudes regarding economic insecurity aren't a function of their cognition? Is it, then, your position that public opinion research isn't interested in cognition? Or that attitudes regarding economic insecurity aren't public opinion? Or something else?
So, attitudes regarding economic insecurity: a function of people's cognition or not?
Posted 1 month ago # -
This post is a Hebrew year that started in the evening before January 30, 1933 and ended on February 2, 1943. It was a bad year.
Posted 1 month ago # -
And a long year, apparently. Lots of lunar months?
Posted 1 month ago # -
So people's attitudes regarding economic insecurity aren't a function of their cognition?
The study that Herbert cites is not about people's attitude toward economic security. Instead, it is making a claim of how "economically (in)security" people in the U.S. actually are.
This is how Herbert describes the study in question:
The analysis was done by a team of researchers led by Professor Jacob Hacker of Yale University. They created an economic security index, which measures the percentage of Americans who experience a decrease in their household income of 25 percent or more in one year without having the financial resources to offset that loss. (Major medical expenses were counted as a decrease in available income.)
There is no mention here of people's attitudes toward anything.
Posted 1 month ago # -
It's true, the report isn't about perceptions, it's about objective well-being. Though to be fair the first figure is about perceptions.
OK, so if we deal with objective data, such as well-being or perhaps election returns, then the ILP doesn't mind the use of quantitative data. We're getting somewhere.
It must be frustrating for ILP to see Brooks praise quant methods repeatedly, reporters cite and interview quants, and now even Herbert praises quantitative methods, calling a quant study 'rigorous.' And of course Krugman is a quant's quant. So here you have the newspaper of record of the English language totally embracing quant methods.
It's like when Brooks wrote that the best book on the recent economic crisis was a quantitative book. That one really hurt his case as well.
Posted 1 month ago # -
So here you have the newspaper of record of the English language totally embracing quant methods
Define "totally embrace", because the vast majority of NYT editorials and articles make no reference to quant social science. Instead, virtually every piece in the NYT is qual.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Though to be fair the first figure is about perceptions.
What are you referring to?
Posted 1 month ago # -
^ The first figure in the report.
OK, so let me get this straight. You've argued that without immutable laws, there is little utility in the use of quantitative methods, correct?
Economic well-being as measured in the report isn't determined by such laws, correct? I.e., there is no immutable law that dictates that all minority households will score low on the index, correct?
Therefore, it should be your position that quantitative methods are of little utility to study economic well-being (since the latter is not determined by immutable laws), correct?
That's your position. It would be consistent with what you've argued so far here and the old blog.
Herbert obviously disagrees with your position since he praises this study as being rigorous, and it forms that basis of his op-ed.
That's the only point I was making. I'm not sure why you're going out of your way to refute it--it's the position you've clearly staked here. I'm not sure why you're moving away from it at this point. Perhaps you're realizing the error of your ways?
It's okay, by the way, that the NYT op-ed page consistently disagrees with your position. It doesn't really change much. But what it does is undermine any claim you may have in the future (or had in the past) to the effect that the NYT and the media generally agree with your position. Let's remember that the next time you link to a random NYT article here.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Economic well-being as measured in the report isn't determined by such laws, correct? I.e., there is no immutable law that dictates that all minority households will score low on the index, correct?
Therefore, it should be your position that quantitative methods are of little utility to study economic well-being (since the latter is not determined by immutable laws), correct?
Quant social science methods are useful as descriptive tools, but not as analytical ones. This is the crux of the matter. In other words, the study that Herbert cites describes increasing "economic insecurity" but does not explain why this insecurity is increasing.
Posted 1 month ago # -
This argument is less about quant vs. qual methods and more about the relationship between theory and data.
Posted 1 month ago # -
This argument is less about quant vs. qual methods and more about the relationship between theory and data.
What do you mean by the "relationship between theory and data"?
Posted 1 month ago # -
We can all agree: what you are saying is pure bullshit, with or without numbers.
Posted 1 month ago # -
the study that Herbert cites describes increasing "economic insecurity" but does not explain why this insecurity is increasing.
p.iii: "The ESI rises and falls with the state of the economy, and especially the unemployment rate."
p. iv: "Those with the most income and education have faced the least insecurity. The less affluent, those with limited education, African Americans, and Hispanics have faced the most."
p.13 has a discussion of the effect of age.
p.14 has a discussion of the effect of income, education, and household type.
p.15 has a discussion of the effect of race/ethnicity.
p.15: "The largest contribution to both the level of the ESI and the upward trend is the increasing chance of large drops in household income."
p.17: "The long-term trend toward insecurity stems from the gradual but clear rise in the chance of individuals experiencing large declines in their household income."
p.17: "Existing studies and the ESI suggest three linked causes for this upward trend.... the earnings of male workers have become more unstable since the 1970s... transfer income... appears to have become more unstable since the 1970s.... the rising prevalence of two-earner couples does not appear to have provided a big income cushion to families."
Posted 1 month ago # -
p.13 has a discussion of the effect of age.
p.14 has a discussion of the effect of income, education, and household type.
p.15 has a discussion of the effect of race/ethnicity.
All that is being noted here is statistical relationships, and not why they exist.
Posted 1 month ago # -
"Existing studies and the ESI suggest three linked causes for this upward trend.... the earnings of male workers have become more unstable since the 1970s... transfer income... appears to have become more unstable since the 1970s.... the rising prevalence of two-earner couples does not appear to have provided a big income cushion to families."
This study does not answer why to any of these.
Posted 1 month ago # -
This study does not answer why to any of these.
Put differently, the current state of economic affairs can only be explained through qualitative analysis of investment and government decisions. Quant analysis can only document the outcomes of these decisions, but not analytically account for them.
Posted 1 month ago # -
What do I mean when I say this discussion is about the relationship between theory and data? I mean, it seems like some posts are arguing descriptive stats don't explain why patterns are in the data (fine, they don't). But, why should they? Isn't that why we come up with theories in the first place?
Posted 1 month ago # -
"All that is being noted here is statistical relationships, and not why they exist."
Who ever said that a relationship tells you why they exist? Of course they don't. You need a theory for that. Are you under the impression that quants have no theory?
Posted 1 month ago # -
"This study does not answer why to any of these. "
Never said it did. It points to other studies that do (this is a 15-page report, you can't answer every single question in a short report).
"Put differently, the current state of economic affairs can only be explained through qualitative analysis of investment and government decisions. Quant analysis can only document the outcomes of these decisions, but not analytically account for them. "
That's your opinion. My point was to discredit your previous claim that the study merely described increasing insecurity. It does more than that. No point to lie about it, now that you have finally read it.
Posted 1 month ago #