Andreas Flache

Manu Muñoz-Herrera

Explanation and PredictionTutorial Week 2 - Application of Theories

Block A 2012/2013

Brief conclusion from the lecture:The problem with inductionChecklist

Part 3: InductionThus, is there a better method than deduction?

The inductive approachSome social scientists argue that an inductive approach is better.

During the French Revolution, many people were very dissatisfied with their living conditions.

In Leipzing 1989, many people were very dissatisfied with their living conditions

It is always true that there will be protest if people were very dissatisfied with their living conditions.

...

John Stuart Mill 1806-1873

Inductive reasoning means that one generalizes from several observations to general laws

David Humes1711-1776

David Humes, however, discovered a problem with inductive reasoning

The covering law model is based on the deduction principle. It tells us that if all statements of the explanans are true, then the explanandum must be true as well. (This follows from logic- see next week).

The deduction principle is a general statement (a law) which is always true.

There is, however, no induction principle. to arrive at one, one would need to use induction (= infer the general principle from several single cases). Therefore, however, you need an induction principle. To get this, in turn, you need an induction principle.

Induction implies an infinite regress. This makes it problematic.

Part 4: Check List

Check List

Try to include in the explanans theoretically plausible or empirically supported statements (=assumptions). This is key if the prediction depends very much on this particular assumption.

Of course, statements which have not been tested and which are not plausible can be true. So allow room for speculation Typical assumptions which appear innocent but often are crucial:

linearity, normal distribution, huge groups. Use one word to describe a concept. Avoid synonyms, or at least define

them explicitly. Never describe more than one phenomenon with one concept.

E.g., “socially integrated in a group”, “attached to the group”, “strongly identifying with a group”, could all mean the same in theory (that can be confussing).

when you develop an explanation or a prediction, take care of the following things (in addition to checking the adequacy conditions.

Check List (II) Formulate the laws as general as possible (see also next week)

E.g., All students need to eat All humans need to eat All mammals need to eat

However, sometimes generalization does not make sense

All students follow the lecture All mammals follow the lecture

If a statement is true, it does not imply that the generalized statement is true as well (that would be induction).

Check List (III)

However, the more general a statement is the more empirical content it typically has. That is: the more testable statements you can derive from it.

For instance, with a general theory of political protest, we can not only test the theory of Leipzig 1989, but also France 1789 and for Iran 2013, etc.

If you do not find the right laws, try to derive them from other, more general laws.

If the explanandum is complex, break it down to subproblems and tackle them one-by-one (e.g., revolution -> protest).

Connection between modelsLave & MarchHempel & Oppenheim

Lave & March model:

Charles A. Lave James G. March

4 Steps

Observe Speculate Deduce Ask

Facts

Phenomenon

result of unknown process

Process

other results

Implications

are implicationsempirically

correct?

Modify

Hempel & Oppenheim model:

Explanans General Law (L1)

Antecedent Condition (C1)

Explanandum Singular Statement (E)

Hempel & Oppenheim model:

Explanans General Law (L1)

Antecedent Condition (C1)

Explanandum Singular Statement (E)

Phenomenon to be explained

Observe

Sentences used to explain E.

process (model)

Speculate

Other results

Deduce

1

2

3

Hempel & Oppenheim model:

Explanans General Law (L1)

Antecedent Condition (C1)

Explanandum Singular Statement (E)

This is not enough: Conditions of adequacy.

1

2

3

Explanandum follows logically from the explanans

Explanans must contain general laws and conditions (any kind?)

Explanans must have empirical content

4 ???

Discussion Assignment 2

Based on the article by Opp and Gern

Karl Dieter Opp

Hidden assumptions

Motivation to do the assignments

Observed Phenomenon: Teachers motivate the students to make the assignment? (board)

Assumption: Teachers and students are grown-ups.

Question: Why do some teachers motivate students to make the assignments?

Motivation to do the assignments

Antecedent Conditions: Assignments are not graded

Observed Phenomenon: Students don’t make the assignments

Assumption: Teachers and students are grown-ups.

Question: Why don’t students make the assignments?

Motivation to do the assignments

Explanation:

Law-like: In general, if people (students) perceive no cost for avoiding effort, they will avoid effortConditions: The assignments are not graded

Conclusion: Students will avoid effort.

Hidden/implicit assumptions?

Motivation to do the assignments

Explanation:

Law-like: In general, if people (students) perceive no cost for avoiding effort, they will avoid effortConditions: The assignments are not graded

Conclusion: Students will avoid effort.

Hidden/implicit assumptions?

A’: Making the assignment is a subset of effort

A’’: Failed graded assignments are a subset of costs

What if doing assignments is fun for someone, and it implies no effort?

What if a student does not care about failing the course, and thus there is no cost?

Motivation to do the assignments

Explanation 2:

Law-like: In general, if people can measure costs along time, they can calculate the difference between doing one full effort in a single point in time and multiple smaller efforts along time?

Conditions: The assignments are not graded (but are not free of costs)

Conclusion: ???

Motivation to do the assignments

Explanation 2:

Law-like: In general, if people can measure costs along time, they can calculate the difference between doing one full effort in a single point in time and multiple smaller efforts along time?

Conditions: The assignments are not graded (but are not free of costs)

Conclusion: Students make the assignments to get better results in the exam (they won’t need to take the resit)

Hidden/implicit assumptions?

The actual discussion of the assignment

Revolution East Germany:

Why did people protested?

Assignments? Prediction: Most students will not make the assignment.

Question:

Any surprising result?Question:

Revolution East Germany:

Why did people protested?

Assignments?

Question:There were many factors with different relevance.

Any surprising result?Question:Repression variables are not significant.

What matters is high public goods motivation and having friends critical of the regime.

Particularly, the cost of repression was lower for the monday prayer demonstrations.

Rational Choice perspective:

Cheap-talk After the people protested for the first time in September, the threat

of being killed became non-credible.

Threshold Models Who went first? How many people did others needed to attend to

the second demonstration?

Rational Choice perspective:

Cheap-talk After the people protested for the first time in September, the threat

of being killed became non-credible.

Threshold Models Who went first? How many people did others needed to attend to

the second demonstration?

Think: would you be deterred to (i) protest given the sanctions? Repression? (ii) in which cases, for you, would repression bot be a deterrence factor? For example, for me, when it does not exist (cheap talk).

Deterrence and Crime

Classwork

Rational Choice theory

Pro’s

Con’s

Main Assumptions

Anything about

criminals?

Opportunity cost

Would you become a criminal? When would you commit a crime?

Note: It is important to understand the object of your study, not only look at it through a ``scientific microscope’’. It is also important to step aside and speculate beyond your opinions.

Two studies on Drug Dealing

Levitt and Venkatesh (2000) Muñoz-Herrera and Palacio (2006)

Agents involved: drug dealers, consumers, and police, government.Country:U.S.A. (Drug consuming country)

Country:Colombia (Producing country)

Law: In both countries, drugs are illegal.

Exercise:

L1: The more utility an individual perceives, to obtain from choosing a particular action, the more likely the individual will choose this action.

Two studies on Drug Dealing

L1: The more utility an individual perceives, to obtain from choosing a particular action, the more likely the individual will choose this action.

C1: Prices of illegal drugs in drug producing countries are very low

C2: Prices of illegal drugs in drug consuming countries are very high

E1: In U.S. the drug dealing market is organized by gangs and they make use of violence between them

E2: In Colombia. the drug dealing market is organized individual dealers and they do not make use of violence between them

General Law:

Antecedent Conditions:

Observed Phenomenon:

See you next week: Logic.