Lecture Notes 1

• The first week is more modest in scope, focusing on:

• Understanding the distinction between independent variables (causes) and dependent variables
(effects).

• Formulating and testing hypotheses that connect causes to consequences.

• Grasping the concept of causality in political analysis.

• Clarifying what constitutes a case and why multiple cases are usually required for comparison.
What is Comparative Politics?

• Comparative politics is a subfield of political science that focuses on comparing political

systems, processes, and events, usually across countries but sometimes across other units.

• It is defined by its reliance on the comparative method , a systematic way of studying politics
that treats cases as data points for broader inference.

• For many students, comparative politics represents a new way of thinking . Rather than only
describing or categorising politics, it asks: how do we explain variation across cases?

• Comparative politics is not the same as current affairs commentary: it is more systematic and
often aims to generalise beyond individual events. The “Scientific” Study of Politics and Inference

• Political science differs from the natural sciences because it cannot typically run controlled
experiments on societies. For instance, political scientists cannot randomly assign countries to
have different constitutions or economic systems.
• Despite this, politics can still be studied scientifically by applying the logic of inference .
Inference means using facts we can observe to learn something about facts we cannot directly
observe.

• For example, by looking at how parties switch in Poland’s parliament and how this affects MPs’
electoral fortunes, we can infer more general insights about the relationship between party-
switching and electoral accountability.

• King, Keohane, and Verba (1994) emphasise that the goal of political science is to move from
the known to the unknown through inference, by systematically linking observed evidence to
broader theories. Hypotheses and Variables

• A hypothesis is a statement that proposes a causal relationship between variables. It links an

independent variable (cause) to a dependent variable (effect) .

• The dependent variable is what we want to explain; it depends on something else.

• The independent variable is what we think causes change in the dependent variable.

• Example hypothesis: “The success of economic reforms was determined by opposition success
in the first post-communist elections.”

• Dependent variable: the success of economic reforms.

• Independent variable: the outcome of the first post-communist elections.

• Additional independent variables might also matter, such as:

• Culture (e.g. political traditions that support or hinder democracy).

• Level of economic modernisation (industrialisation, wealth, education).

• Proximity to European markets (integration with the EU).

• These are sometimes described as exogenous variables because they lie outside the immediate
causal chain but may influence outcomes.

• The key point is that hypotheses often compete with each other, and good research involves
testing alternative explanations rather than accepting the first plausible link. Casuality & the
Challenge of Political Research

• Causality in political science is rarely straightforward: outcomes typically have multiple causes.

• Researchers must avoid the “first hunch” fallacy: assuming that the first explanation that comes
to mind is correct.

• Like detectives, political scientists must test different possibilities and rule out alternative
explanations before concluding.

• For example, Poland’s economic reforms may have succeeded not because of election
outcomes but because of its geographic and economic proximity to Europe, which facilitated
trade and integration.

• Similarly, Russia’s democratic breakdown may be explained by corruption, oligarchs, weak civil
society, or historical legacies, and research must consider all these possibilities systematically.
Cases and Case Selection

• A case is the unit of analysis in comparative research. Cases can take many forms, including:

• Countries (e.g. Russia, Poland).

• Regions (e.g. Northern vs Southern Italy in Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work ).

• Groups (e.g. protest movements or social classes).

• Organisations (e.g. political parties).

• Individuals (e.g. leaders, citizens, or protest participants).

• Events (e.g. elections, rallies, conflicts).

• Policies (e.g. health reforms, environmental laws).

• While countries are the most common cases, comparative politics does not limit itself to them.

• Cases must be plural in most research because comparison requires variation.

• The selection of cases is crucial: some countries or units may be more useful than others for
answering a given question. The Russia Case Study (Illustration)

• Students were asked in advance: “Why has democracy failed in Russia?”

• Many student responses confused the definition of democracy (e.g. lack of separation of
powers, authoritarianism, lack of freedoms) with the causes of democratic failure .

• Other answers pointed to elite dominance , media control , economic hardship , and the rise of
nationalism . These explanations highlight important factors but need systematic testing.

• Some responses questioned whether Russia was ever democratic at all. This raises the
measurement problem : how do we classify regimes, and what threshold must a country cross to
count as democratic?

• Historical explanations (“because of history”) can be appealing but must be unpacked into
specific causal mechanisms showing how historical legacies matter today.
• The purpose of the Russia example is not to provide an answer but to show how to approach
the question methodologically: by identifying variables, hypotheses, and cases for comparison.
Alternative Units of Analysis: Beyond Countries

• Comparative politics does not only compare nation-states. Other possible cases include:

• Regions: e.g. comparing Italian regions to study institutional performance.

• Organisations: e.g. political parties in Poland, Britain, or elsewhere.

• Individuals: e.g. MPs, elites, protest participants.

• Events: e.g. the 2011 Arab Spring protests, gender equality marches in the US.

• Policies: comparing policy reforms across different contexts.

• Example: the gender equality protest in Farmington, Maine , where individuals mobilised
differently (participants, bystanders, counter-protesters). This shows how cases can be defined at
the micro-level, not only as states. Key Takeaways

• Comparative politics is about using comparison to study political phenomena scientifically ,

relying on inference to move from known facts to broader generalisations.

• Research requires clearly defined hypotheses that link independent variables (causes) to
dependent variables (effects) .

• Political causality is complex: multiple variables often interact, and ruling out alternative
explanations is as important as identifying the first plausible cause.

• A case is any unit of analysis that can vary and be compared; cases are not limited to countries.
• The failure of democracy in Russia illustrates the need for systematic research design: we
cannot explain it without carefully identifying variables, hypotheses, and appropriate
comparisons.

• Success in this module depends on combining substantive knowledge with methodological

awareness and strong research design skills.
TUTORIAL ADDITIONS:

• Breaking down the definitions/readings.

• IDENTIFY A PHENOMENON