Transparent Social Inquiry: Implications for Political Science

Colin Elman, Diana Kapiszewski, Arthur Lupia

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Political scientists use diverse methods to study important topics. The findings they reach and conclusions they draw can have significant social implications and are sometimes controversial. As a result, audiences can be skeptical about the rigor and relevance of the knowledge claims that political scientists produce. For these reasons, being a political scientist means facing myriad questions about how we know what we claim to know. Transparency can help political scientists address these questions. An emerging literature and set of practices suggest that sharing more data and providing more information about our analytic and interpretive choices can help others understand the rigor and relevance of our claims. At the same time, increasing transparency can be costly and has been contentious. This review describes opportunities created by, and difficulties posed by, attempts to increase transparency. We conclude that, despite the challenges, consensus about the value and practice of transparency is emerging within and across political science's diverse and dynamic research communities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)29-47
Number of pages19
JournalAnnual Review of Political Science
Volume21
DOIs
StatePublished - May 11 2018

Fingerprint

political scientist
political science
transparency
know how
knowledge
community
Values

Keywords

  • data sharing
  • openness
  • replication
  • research ethics
  • social inquiry
  • transparency

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Transparent Social Inquiry : Implications for Political Science. / Elman, Colin; Kapiszewski, Diana; Lupia, Arthur.

In: Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 21, 11.05.2018, p. 29-47.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Elman, Colin ; Kapiszewski, Diana ; Lupia, Arthur. / Transparent Social Inquiry : Implications for Political Science. In: Annual Review of Political Science. 2018 ; Vol. 21. pp. 29-47.
@article{73e9b540031248548a14927534bcb02b,
title = "Transparent Social Inquiry: Implications for Political Science",
abstract = "Political scientists use diverse methods to study important topics. The findings they reach and conclusions they draw can have significant social implications and are sometimes controversial. As a result, audiences can be skeptical about the rigor and relevance of the knowledge claims that political scientists produce. For these reasons, being a political scientist means facing myriad questions about how we know what we claim to know. Transparency can help political scientists address these questions. An emerging literature and set of practices suggest that sharing more data and providing more information about our analytic and interpretive choices can help others understand the rigor and relevance of our claims. At the same time, increasing transparency can be costly and has been contentious. This review describes opportunities created by, and difficulties posed by, attempts to increase transparency. We conclude that, despite the challenges, consensus about the value and practice of transparency is emerging within and across political science's diverse and dynamic research communities.",
keywords = "data sharing, openness, replication, research ethics, social inquiry, transparency",
author = "Colin Elman and Diana Kapiszewski and Arthur Lupia",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1146/annurev-polisci-091515-025429",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "29--47",
journal = "Annual Review of Political Science",
issn = "1094-2939",
publisher = "Annual Reviews Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transparent Social Inquiry

T2 - Implications for Political Science

AU - Elman, Colin

AU - Kapiszewski, Diana

AU - Lupia, Arthur

PY - 2018/5/11

Y1 - 2018/5/11

N2 - Political scientists use diverse methods to study important topics. The findings they reach and conclusions they draw can have significant social implications and are sometimes controversial. As a result, audiences can be skeptical about the rigor and relevance of the knowledge claims that political scientists produce. For these reasons, being a political scientist means facing myriad questions about how we know what we claim to know. Transparency can help political scientists address these questions. An emerging literature and set of practices suggest that sharing more data and providing more information about our analytic and interpretive choices can help others understand the rigor and relevance of our claims. At the same time, increasing transparency can be costly and has been contentious. This review describes opportunities created by, and difficulties posed by, attempts to increase transparency. We conclude that, despite the challenges, consensus about the value and practice of transparency is emerging within and across political science's diverse and dynamic research communities.

AB - Political scientists use diverse methods to study important topics. The findings they reach and conclusions they draw can have significant social implications and are sometimes controversial. As a result, audiences can be skeptical about the rigor and relevance of the knowledge claims that political scientists produce. For these reasons, being a political scientist means facing myriad questions about how we know what we claim to know. Transparency can help political scientists address these questions. An emerging literature and set of practices suggest that sharing more data and providing more information about our analytic and interpretive choices can help others understand the rigor and relevance of our claims. At the same time, increasing transparency can be costly and has been contentious. This review describes opportunities created by, and difficulties posed by, attempts to increase transparency. We conclude that, despite the challenges, consensus about the value and practice of transparency is emerging within and across political science's diverse and dynamic research communities.

KW - data sharing

KW - openness

KW - replication

KW - research ethics

KW - social inquiry

KW - transparency

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046952457&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046952457&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1146/annurev-polisci-091515-025429

DO - 10.1146/annurev-polisci-091515-025429

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85046952457

VL - 21

SP - 29

EP - 47

JO - Annual Review of Political Science

JF - Annual Review of Political Science

SN - 1094-2939

ER -