Unit 1 - Studying Comparative Politics

Learning Objectives

Define comparative politics
Introduce key concepts in comparative politics
Identify different types of comparative political studies
Consider why comparative politics is important
Examine how to undertake comparative political studies
Understand the comparative method and components of research projects
Recognize difficulties and problems faced in comparative politics

What is Comparative Politics?

Definition

Comparative politics is “the subfield of political science that aims to analyze multiple cases using the comparative method.”¹

Scope of Politics

Politics involves not only elections, politicians, political parties, and governments, but also:

Ideas and values
Rights
Expenditure
Policies
Everything that occurs in the public realm

The private realm must also be studied to the extent that it affects or is affected by the public realm.

Core Characteristics

Comparative politics involves:

The systematic study and comparison of politics around the world
Examination of current and historical political issues, systems, and actors
Scholars can study any aspect of political systems and political processes around the world
Primary interest in what goes on within political systems
More than simply describing situations and providing data
A lot of comparative data is collected and published
Developing and working with concepts (e.g., democratization, nationalism, freedom, identity)
Studying politics involves asking questions: what is happening, when, and where?
Most importantly, asking why and how things happen in the public realm
Finding patterns—both differences and similarities in political systems, actors, and issues
Building arguments and providing evidence to support them
Using case studies to accomplish these goals

Why Study Comparative Politics?

Comparative politics serves several important purposes:

Provides a means for learning about other societies and systems
Helps us understand and compare our own system
Studies important concepts, issues, and questions
Helps us understand why things happen

Two Approaches to Study

Approach	Description	Example Question
Empirical Study	Development of studies based on facts and observations	”What factors contributed to this election outcome?”
Normative Arguments	Desire to advance particular outcomes; the way things should be	”What is the best political system?”

The Comparative Method

Step 1: Develop a Question

Focus on why and how questions
Use open-ended questions
Be aware of potential biases

Example Question: What is the relationship between democratic governments’ electoral success and economic prosperity?

Step 2: Determine the Level of Analysis

The level of analysis can be:

The state (e.g., comparing France and Italy)
Groups within states
Events

Step 3: Select Case Studies

Different possibilities for case study design:

Type	Description
Single case study	In-depth examination of one case
Within-case comparison	Comparison of elements within a single case
Two or more country comparison	Direct comparison between multiple countries
Most-similar-state study	Comparing states that share many characteristics
Most-different-state study	Comparing states that differ significantly
Regional/area study	Focus on a specific geographic region

Step 4: Develop Concepts

Concepts are the building blocks for the study of politics
They are ideas or constructs of political phenomena
Examples: nationalism, democracy, populism

Step 5: Operationalize Variables

Operationalization is the process of defining variables based on concepts so they can be measured.

Step 6: Develop a Hypothesis

Identify dependent and independent variables
Propose and examine causation with respect to the variables
Ensure falsifiability—the hypothesis must be testable and capable of being proven false

Example Hypothesis: Governments are voted out of office if the economy has been in decline in the year prior to the election.

Step 7: Test, Conclude, and Build Theory

Draw conclusions from testing
Test with other cases or within-case comparisons
Build toward theory

Types of Reasoning

Deductive Reasoning

Starting with a general idea or existing theory and seeking to test it with case studies.

Example: Beginning with the theory that “governments are re-elected if the economy is strong,” then examining specific elections to test this claim.

Inductive Reasoning

Beginning with specific observations and building a more general argument from this starting point.

Example: Observing that Erin O’Toole lost the leadership of the Conservative Party following the 2021 federal election loss, then developing broader theories about leadership tenure after electoral defeat.

Data in Comparative Research

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Data

Aspect	Quantitative Data	Qualitative Data
Definition	Numbers that can be analyzed using statistics	Information from interviews, documents, policy papers
Study Size	Large-N studies	Small-N studies
Approach	Analysis of large amounts of data, looking for patterns	More detailed examination of fewer cases

Mixed-method studies combine both quantitative and qualitative approaches.

The Research Process

The standard research process follows this path:

$Question \to Hypotheses \to Testing \to Thesis \to Theory$

However, hypotheses are not always confirmed. When disconfirmed, the process includes revision:

$Question \to Hypotheses \to Testing \to Thesis \to Revisions \to Theory$

Theories in political science help us understand cases, though there are always exceptions.

Correlation and Causation

Correlation

Correlation occurs when two or more variables move together. This can be:

Positive Correlation: Variables move in the same direction. $↑ Happiness and ↑ Health$

Negative Correlation: Variables move in opposite directions. $↑ Poverty and ↓ Democracy$

Causation

Causation asserts that an independent variable (X) causes a dependent variable (Y) to occur:

$X \to causes \to Y$

Example: Being happy (X) causes good health (Y)

Often, proxy measures are needed when concepts cannot be directly measured.

Problems in Establishing Causation

Reverse Causation

The causal direction may be opposite to what is hypothesized:

$Y \to causes \to X instead of X \to causes \to Y$

Example: Do nationalist political parties cause increased federal government funding, or does funding enable nationalist parties to emerge?

Endogeneity

A situation where two variables exhibit mutual or reciprocal effects, creating vicious circles or virtuous circles:

$X \leftrightarrow Y$

Intervening Variables

A third variable mediates the relationship between X and Y:

$X \to causes \to Z \to causes \to Y$

Example: Money → advertising/get out the vote campaigns → Electoral Success

Missing Variables (Spurious Correlation)

A third variable (Z) actually causes both X and Y, creating a false appearance of relationship:

$Z \to causes \to X and Z \to causes \to Y$

This results in a spurious correlation—an apparent relationship where no true causal relationship exists.

Difficulties in Comparative Politics Research

Cannot control variables: Unlike in a science lab, we cannot hold variables constant and run experiments again
Many possible variables: The complexity of political systems means numerous factors may be relevant
Researcher bias: All researchers are subject to biases that may shape their research
Data accuracy: Data gathered from opinion polls and surveys may not be accurate
Measurement validity: Questions of whether a measure actually captures or represents the political concept being studied (e.g., how do we measure nationalism?)

Comparative Data Example: World Happiness Index

Each year there is an attempt to assess how happy people are living in their country
Canada ranked 13th on the 2023 list but slipped to 15th on the 2024 list
This represents comparative data, but scholars of comparative politics must ask why these rankings exist and change

Comparative Challenges

Challenge 1: Trump’s Electoral Victories

Why did Donald Trump win the presidency in 2016 and again in 2024?

What concepts might be relevant?
What are the variables?
What difficulties do you face in constructing this study?
What might a comparative study look like?

Challenge 2: Trustworthiness and Political Success

The prime minister of a fictional country X was widely judged to be trustworthy. She won three elections as leader of her party.

Hypothesis: Being trustworthy leads to political success.
What are the variables in this hypothesis?
How can we operationalize these variables?
What are other possible variables that can/should be examined?

Conclusion

In comparative politics, the world is our laboratory
There are a huge number of possible subjects, case studies, concepts, and variables
Variables can correlate in different ways or not correlate at all
It is very difficult to be definitive in findings—researchers seek tendency statements rather than absolute claims
Rigorous research design and practices can help avoid some difficulties
Despite challenges, the study of comparative politics remains important and interesting

Definitions

Term	Definition
Comparative Politics	The subfield of political science that aims to analyze multiple cases using the comparative method
Empirical Study	Development of studies based on facts and observations
Normative Arguments	Arguments that advance particular outcomes; concerned with the way things should be
Operationalization	The process of defining variables based on concepts so they can be measured
Hypothesis	A testable statement about the expected relationship between variables
Falsifiability	The requirement that a hypothesis must be capable of being proven false
Dependent Variable	The variable that is affected or caused by another variable (Y)
Independent Variable	The variable that causes or affects another variable (X)
Deductive Reasoning	Starting with a general idea or theory and testing it with specific case studies
Inductive Reasoning	Beginning with specific observations and building a more general argument
Quantitative Data	Numerical data that can be analyzed using statistics
Qualitative Data	Non-numerical information gathered from interviews, documents, and policy analysis
Large-N Studies	Quantitative studies involving analysis of large amounts of data
Small-N Studies	Qualitative studies using smaller amounts of data with detailed examination
Mixed-Method Studies	Research approaches that combine both quantitative and qualitative methods
Correlation	When two or more variables move together (same or opposite directions)
Positive Correlation	When variables move in the same direction
Negative Correlation	When variables move in opposite directions
Causation	The assertion that one variable causes another to happen
Proxy Measures	Indirect measures used when a concept cannot be directly measured
Reverse Causation	When the causal direction is opposite to what was hypothesized
Endogeneity	A situation where two variables exhibit mutual or reciprocal effects
Intervening Variables	Variables that mediate the relationship between independent and dependent variables
Missing Variable	An unaccounted variable that actually causes both the independent and dependent variables
Spurious Correlation	An apparent relationship between variables where no true causal relationship exists
Measurement Validity	Whether a measure actually captures or represents the political concept being studied
Tendency Statements	Conclusions that indicate general patterns rather than absolute claims

Dickovick et al., as cited in course materials. ↩

Lecture Notes

Explorer