Tilmelding sker via STADS-Selvbetjening indenfor annonceret tilmeldingsperiode, som du kan se på Studieadministrationens hjemmeside.

Når du tilmelder dig kurset, skal du være opmærksom på, om der er sammenfald i tidspunktet for kursusafholdelse og eksamen med andre kurser, du har valgt. Uddannelsesplanlægningen tager udgangspunkt i, at det er muligt at gennemføre et anbefalet studieforløb uden overlap. Men omkring valgfrie elementer og studieplaner som går ud over de anbefalede studieforløb, kan der forekomme overlap, alt efter hvilke kurser du vælger.

Registration through STADS-Selvbetjeningwithin the announced registration period, as you can see on the Studyadministration homepage.

When registering for courses, please be aware of the potential conflicts between courses or exam dates on courses. The planning of course activities at Roskilde University is based on the recommended study programs which do not overlap. However, if you choose optional courses and/or study plans that goes beyond the recommended study programs, an overlap of lectures or exam dates may occur depending on which courses you choose.

Ved for få tilmeldte aflyses kurset.

In case of too few registrations, the course will be cancelled.

We used to believe that experiments did not work in the social sciences. Today, that view has radically changed. Randomized controlled trials and survey experiments fill the pages of scholarly journals, covering everything from government corruption and development interventions over voting behavior and attitudes to immigrants to public recruitment and motivation.

Outside the academy as well, experiments are gaining ground. Governments, including Danish central and local government, evaluate policies experimentally with increasing frequency; think tanks, experts, and even algorithms used to budget public expenditure, increasingly weigh experimental evidence highly; and consultancies increasingly place experimentation as the gold standard for evidence used in serving their clients.

The course introduces students to the art and science of social experimentation, focusing extensively on survey experiments. It places emphasis heavily on design and implementation, for a simple reason: With properly designed and executed experiments, the statistical tools needed for analysis are exceedingly simple. You already know them.

The course consists of ten modules, each oscillating between lectures focused on exemplary published experiments and student work on designing their own experiment, which will form the basis of the exam.

The aim is that students will gain: Knowledge: 1. Knowledge of the purpose and logic of experimental research design. 2. Knowledge of types of experimental designs in social science. 3. Knowledge of the tools needed to analyze experimental data. Skills: 1. Skills in understanding and evaluating experimental results. 2. Skills in designing experiments to answer given or self-determined research questions. 3. Skills in critically assessing and discussing limitations of experimental designs. Competences: 1. Competence to evaluate and assess the benefits and feasibility of experimentation in study and work-life settings. 2. Competence to collaborate with others in the design and implementation of experiments. 3. Competence to reflect on skills acquisition and take responsibility for professional development.

Sessions: 20 hours Preparation: 70 hours including readings, exercises, and design of own experiments. Exam: 45 hours. In total: 135 hours.

Session 1: The Quest for Causality 1. Gerber, A. S., & Green, D. P. (2012). Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation. New York: WW Norton, chapters 1-2 2. Morton, R. and K. C. Williams. 2010. Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, chapter 2

Session 2: Survey Experiments I: Framing and Priming 1. Pedersen, M. J., Stritch, J. M., & Taggart, G. 2017. “Citizen perceptions of procedural fairness and the moderating roles of ‘belief in a just world’ and ‘public service motivation’ in public hiring”. Public Administration, 95(4), 874-894 2. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. 2007. “Framing theory.” Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126 3. Berinsky, A. J. 2017. Rumors and health care reform: Experiments in political misinformation. British Journal of Political Science, 47(2), 241-262.

Session 3: Survey Experiments II: Factorized Experiments 1. Wallander, L. 2009. 25 years of factorial surveys in sociology: A review. Social Science Research, 38(3), 505-520. 2. Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J., & Yamamoto, T. (2014). Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Political Analysis, 22(1), 1-30 3. Hainmueller, J., & Hopkins, D. J. (2015). The hidden American immigration consensus: A conjoint analysis of attitudes toward immigrants. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 529-548

Session 4: Survey Experiments III: Measurement Issues 1. Adcock, R., & Collier, D. 2001. “Measurement validity: A shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research.” American political science review, 95(3), 529-546 (read only if you have not read the text before) 2. Tourangeau, R., L. J. Rips, og K. Rasniski. 2000. The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-22; 255-288

Session 5: Lab Experiments 1. Esteve, M., Urbig, D., Van Witteloostuijn, A., & Boyne, G. (2016). Prosocial behavior and public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 177-187 2. Bol, D. (2019). Putting politics in the lab: A review of lab experiments in political science. Government and Opposition, 54(1), 167-190 3. Boly, A., & Gillanders, R. (2018). Anti-corruption policy making, discretionary power and institutional quality: An experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 152, 314-327.

Session 6: Analysis I: Heterogeneous Effects 1. Gerber, A. S., & Green, D. P. (2012). Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation. New York: WW Norton, chapter 9 2. Meyer-Sahling, J. H., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Schuster, C. (2018). The Causal Effect of Public Service Motivation on Ethical Behavior in the Public Sector: Evidence from a Large-Scale Survey Experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.

Session 7: Analysis II: Endogeneity 1. Dafoe, A., Zhang, B., & Caughey, D. (2018). Information equivalence in survey experiments. Political Analysis, 26(4), 399-416. 2. Reread: Meyer-Sahling, J. H., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Schuster, C. (2018). The Causal Effect of Public Service Motivation on Ethical Behavior in the Public Sector: Evidence from a Large-Scale Survey Experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.

Session 8: Mediation: Can we Test Mechanisms? 1. Gerber, A. S., & Green, D. P. (2012). Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation. New York: WW Norton, chapter 10 2. Green, D. P., Ha, S. E., & Bullock, J. G. (2010). Enough already about “black box” experiments: Studying mediation is more difficult than most scholars suppose. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 628(1), 200-208. 3. Acharya, A., Blackwell, M., & Sen, M. (2018). Analyzing causal mechanisms in survey experiments. Political Analysis, 26(4), 357-378.

Session 9: Natural Experiments 1. Dunning, T. 2012. Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, chapters 2-3 2. Hyde, S. D. (2007). The observer effect in international politics: Evidence from a natural experiment. World politics, 60(1), 37-63

Session 10: Outro 1. Reread: Pedersen, M. J., Stritch, J. M., & Taggart, G. 2017. “Citizen perceptions of procedural fairness and the moderating roles of ‘belief in a just world’ and ‘public service motivation’ in public hiring”. Public Administration, 95(4), 874-894 2. Barabas, J., & Jerit, J. (2010). Are survey experiments externally valid? American Political Science Review, 104(2), 226-242.

Evaluation of students occurs in the exam, via exercises, peer feedback, and discussions with lecturer. Evaluation surveys will be distributed at least once during the course.

Oral group examination based on an assignment (the written product) and a poster (size: two A2 pages or equivalent), both prepared by the group.

The groups may consist of 2 to 6 students.

The students start the examination with a short presentation, after which the examination is conducted as a dialogue.

During the examination, questions can be asked regarding the entire syllabus.

The size specifications for the written product are as follows:

For 2 students, a maximum of 21,600 characters, including spaces

For 3 students, a maximum of 21,600 characters, including spaces

For 4 students, a maximum of 21,600 characters, including spaces

For 5 students, a maximum of 21,600 characters, including spaces

For 6 students, a maximum of 21,600 characters, including spaces

The size specifications include the cover, table of contents, bibliography, figures and other illustrations, but exclude any appendices. Time allowed for examination including time used for assessment:

For 2 examinees, 20 minutes

For 3 examinees, 30 minutes

For 4 examinees, 40 minutes

For 5 examinees, 50 minutes

For 6 examinees, 60 minutes

There is an individual assessment of each student’s performance. The assessment is an overall assessment of the product(s) and the oral examination.

Permitted support and preparation materials during the examination: All.

Assessment: 7-point grading scale.

Moderation: Internal co-assessor

• Knowledge and understanding:

  Knowledge and understanding of academic and/or scientifically based practice-oriented methods and their application and relevance on an advanced level

• Being able to understand and critically reflect upon academic and/or scientifically based practice-oriented methods in the field of social science research and how they are used in the students’ future careers as, for example, lecturers, project managers, consultants, managers or researchers

• Skills:

  Carrying out studies and analyses with the aid of academic and/or scientifically based practice-oriented methods

• Evaluating and selecting methods from research-related and professional practices

• Being able to communicate and discuss academic and/or scientifically based practice-oriented studies in a type of language that is correct, clear, professionally accurate, well-structured and well-argued

• Competences:

  Co-operation with colleagues in the application of various academic and/or scientifically based practice-oriented methods and forms of analysis in relation to relevant issues in research and professional contexts

• Reflection on one’s own learning and taking responsibility for one’s own professional development

• Research and professional premises for academic and scientifically based practice-oriented analyses
• Approaches that can be taken towards the use of academic and/or scientifically based practice-oriented tools in research and professional contexts, respectively

Lectures, exercises, student presentations, peer feedback and discussions.

Optional course