PhD Courses in Denmark

Course coordinators: Manuele Citi & Janine Leschke
Department of Management, Society and Communication (MSC)

Faculty

Associate Professor Manuele Citi
Department of Management, Society and Communication, CBS

Professor with special responsibilities Janine Leschke
Department of Management, Society and Communication, CBS

Associate Professor Jasper Hotho
Department of Management, Society and Communication, CBS

Associate Professor Rasmus Brun Pedersen
Department of Political Science, Aarhus University

Senior Researcher Rasmus Tue Pedersen
VIVE – The Danish Center for Social Science Research

Postdoc Anne-Karen Hüske
Department of Management, Society and Communication, CBS

Prerequisites 
This course is for PhD students only. The PhD students must hand in a five pages (maximum) written presentation on the research question, theories and method(s) of their project, in which they select one or two topics of the curriculum and explain how they can be applied to their project. The short paper should include specific references to the literature of the course and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of their chosen approach in comparison to other relevant approaches. 

Students will have the opportunity to revise this based on the lectures and group discussions during the course and to present their ideas for additional feedback at the end of the course.

Deadline for submission of short papers (max 5 pages) is 10 days before the beginning of the course.

The short papers provide material for discussion during the course, and the students must be willing to participate in discussions of other papers and presentations.

It is a precondition for receiving the course diploma that the student attends the whole course.

Aim
The interlinkage between theory and research design is in focus when this course introduces PhD students to the core approaches constituting social science research approaches. We will focus in particular on conceptual analysis and case-selection,  systematic literature reviewing, process tracing and comparative qualitative studies, survey, experimental and mixed methods approaches, network analysis and elite interviews. 

The aim of the course is to develop the awareness of different designs applied in social science research. This will allow the course participant to reflect critically upon their own projects and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses in comparison to other relevant approaches.

Learning Objectives

• Describe and justify the research design of the PhD project
• Compare and contrast how methodological approaches interlink in different research designs
• Discuss strengths and weaknesses of the theoretical and methodological choices made in the PhD project
• Apply the knowledge and insights from the course in a critical reflection on their own project

Teaching style
Dialogue lectures, group discussions, feedback on student presentations.

Lecture plan 

Content and course literature
You find the content and required readings for each session below. Book chapters of the core readings will be provided by the course faculty on CANVAS; it will be the students' responsibility to obtain the journal articles if these are not uploaded on CANVAS. All core texts should be read prior to the start of the course. For most sessions you have at least one text which is a more general description of the theory or method and at least one text which is an application.

Day 1

Conceptual analysis (Manuele Citi)
In this session we will introduce concepts as essential tools for theoretical and empirical analysis. We will focus on issues of conceptualization, such as conceptual stretching, the link between conceptual intension and extension, the relationship between conceptual definition and empirical measurement, and the levels and rules of aggregation for multi-dimensional concepts.

Readings
Goertz, G. (2006) Concept Intension and Extension, in Goertz, G., Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide, Princeton: Princeton University Press, Ch.2 (pp. 69-94).

Munck, G. L. and Verkuilen, J. (2002) Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: Evaluating alternative indices, Comparative Political Studies 35(1): 5-34.

Supplementary Readings
Adcock, Robert, and David Collier. 2001. “Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research.” American Political Sciences Review 95(3): 529–546.

Coppedge, Michael et al. 2011. “Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach.” Perspectives on Politics 9(02): 247–67.

Comparative qualitative analysis  (Jasper Hotho)
This session provides an introduction to the value and logic of comparative research designs in the social sciences. Key issues that will be discussed are the different rationales for adopting comparative research designs, the design choices this involves, and the challenges and pitfalls involved in doing comparative research and getting it published. With the help of two exercises, this session aims to equip PhD students with the ability to evaluate the quality and appropriateness of comparative research designs, the ability to articulate both the merits and limitations of such research designs, and the ability to offer constructive suggestions for improvement.

Readings
Ragin, C.C. (1987) Case-oriented comparative methods. In: C.C. Ragin, The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA (pp. 34-52).

Locke, R. M., & Thelen, K. (1995). Apples and oranges revisited: Contextualized comparisons and the study of comparative labor politics. Politics & Society, 23(3), 337-367. [Please read pp. 337-344; rest optional]

Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419-1440.

Day 2 

Systematic literature review (Anne-Karen Hüske)
Systematic Literature Review is a methodology to systematically identify, critically appraise and synthesize relevant past and recent research in order to respond to a clearly formulated topic and identify avenues for future research. This session will introduce different types of literature reviews, different approaches to systematic literature reviews, and how to do a systematic review and present the results of the research synthesis.

Readings
Bacq, S., Drover, W., Kim, P.H. 2021 Writing bold, broad, and rigorous review articles in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 36 (6).

Fan, D., Breslin, D., Callahan, J.L., Iszatt-White, M. (2022) Advancing literature review methodology through rigour, generativity, scope and transparency. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24:171–180.

Process tracing (Rasmus Brun Pedersen)
Process-tracing in social science is a method for studying causal mechanisms linking causes with outcomes. This enables the researcher to make strong inferences about how a cause (or set of causes) contributes to producing an outcome. Derek Beach introduces a refined definition of process-tracing, differentiating it into three distinct variants and explaining the applications and limitations of each. 

Readings
Beach (2017) ‘Process-tracing methods.’ Oxford Research Encyclopedia. http://politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-176

O'Mahoney, J. (2017). Making the Real: Rhetorical Adduction and the Bangladesh Liberation War. International Organization, 71(2), 317-348. doi:10.1017/S0020818317000054

Supplementary Readings
Beach and Pedersen (2016) Causal Case Study Methods. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. (Especially chapters 2 – 5, 9)

Day 3 

The logic and design of surveys (Rasmus Tue Pedersen)
In this session, we will briefly discuss the use of surveys in social science research, and the remainder of the section will primarily focus on possible ways of handling potential challenges when doing survey research. We will discuss challenges related to, e.g., low response rates, respondent satisficing and social desirability, question wording effects, context effects and non-attitudes. We will also address some of the practicalities of survey research.

Readings
Krosnick, Jon A. (1999). Survey Research, Annual Review of Psychology. 50: 537-67 (31 pages).

Kennedy, C. et al. (2018). An Evaluation of the 2016 Election Polls in the United States. Public Opinion Quarterly. 82(1): 1-33 (33 pages) 

Supplementary readings
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press.

Groves, R. M., Fowler Jr, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2011). Survey methodology (Vol. 561). John Wiley & Sons.

Dillman, D. A. (2011). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons.

Stern, M. J., Bilgen, I., & Dillman, D. A. (2014). The state of survey methodology: Challenges, dilemmas, and new frontiers in the era of the tailored design. Field Methods, 26(3), 284-301.

Experiments and survey experiments (Rasmus Tue Pedersen)
Experiments are key tools in the methodological toolbox for anyone interested in causal inference, and the use of experiments in social science has increased dramatically. This session cover the logic of randomized experiments, different types of experiments (lab, field, and survey) and the key considerations when designing, analyzing and interpreting experiments. As a part of this, we will also discuss ethical considerations for researchers using experimental methods.

Readings
Druckman, J. et al. (2011). Cambridge handbook of experimental political science. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Chapters 2 and 3 (26 pages)

Mutz, Diana C. (2011). Population-Based Survey Experiments. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Chapter 1 (23 pages)

Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American economic review, 94(4), 991-1013. (23 pages)

Pedersen, RT, JO Dahlgaard & M Citi (2019). Voter Reactions to Candidate Background Characteristics Depend on Candidate Policy Positions. Electoral Studies, 61. (10 pages)

Supplementary readings
Druckman, J. et al. (2011). Cambridge handbook of experimental political science. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. (Remaining chapters)

Mutz, Diana C. (2011). Population-Based Survey Experiments. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. (Remaining chapters)

McDermott, R. (2002). Experimental methods in political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1): 31-61.

Day 4

Mixed-method approaches (Janine Leschke)
Mixed or multi-methods approaches combining and integrating qualitative and quantitative social sciences tools have become popular in recent years. Rather than seeing methods as mutually exclusive alternatives, such approaches exploit the fact that multiple measurement offers the chance to assess each method’s validity in the light of other methods and thereby come to more sound conclusions. This session will discuss the advantages and drawbacks of mixed-methods approaches in PhD projects. We will in particular consider the combination of indepths case-study analysis with statistical analysis.

Readings
Creswell, J. and Plano Clark, V. (2018) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, Third Edition, London: Sage, ch. 3 (Core mixed methods designs)

Lieberman, E. (2005) Nested Analysis as a Mixed-Method Strategy for Comparative Research, The American Political Science Review 99(3), 435-452.

Supplementary Readings
Casal Bértoa, F. (2017) It’s been mostly about money! A Multi-method research approach to the sources of institutionalization, Sociological Methods & Research 46(4): 683-714.

Fearon, J. and Laitin, D. (2008) Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, in: Box-Steffensmeier, J., Brady, H. and Collier D. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 756-776.

Becker, R. and Teney, C. (2020) Understanding high-skilled intra-European migration patterns: the case of European physicians in Germany, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46:9, 1737-1755.

Day 5 

Elite interviews (Carolin Schütze)

Elite interviews are often central sources of data for small-n analyses (case studies and comparative analyses). This session addresses various issues with elite interviews, from practical tricks of interviewing, to ethical dilemmas, as well as how to use elite interviews in your research and how to code them.

Readings
Symposium consisting of seven short articles in Political Science and Politics on Interview techniques in social sciences, 35(4): 2002. Access the articles here: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/issue/E30FCCB00ED41AA25653C84094851A72