2017
DOI: 10.1057/s41304-017-0130-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

what is the point? teaching graduate students how to construct political science research puzzles

Abstract: One of the key challenges graduate students face is how to come up with a good rationale for their theses. Unfortunately, the methods literature in and beyond political science does not provide much advice on this important issue. While focusing on how to conduct research, this literature has largely neglected the question of why a study should be undertaken. The limited discussions that can be found suggest that new research is justified if it (1) fills a 'gap'; (2) addresses an important real-world problem; … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although there has been long-standing debate about whether there has been a Kuhnian revolution in psychology with respect to the alleged cognitive revolution more than half a century ago [1,2] , there is little doubt that today psychology researchers mostly perform what Kuhn described as normal science [3] . Moreover, normal science thinking has pervaded graduate education, which is the issue of present concern [4,5] . Kuhn's normal science puzzle solving, not Feyerabend's emphasis on questioning basic assumptions, often has been touted as the best direction for training graduate students in research.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although there has been long-standing debate about whether there has been a Kuhnian revolution in psychology with respect to the alleged cognitive revolution more than half a century ago [1,2] , there is little doubt that today psychology researchers mostly perform what Kuhn described as normal science [3] . Moreover, normal science thinking has pervaded graduate education, which is the issue of present concern [4,5] . Kuhn's normal science puzzle solving, not Feyerabend's emphasis on questioning basic assumptions, often has been touted as the best direction for training graduate students in research.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kuhn's normal science puzzle solving, not Feyerabend's emphasis on questioning basic assumptions, often has been touted as the best direction for training graduate students in research. For example, Gustafsson and Hagström [5] asserted: "Constructing research puzzles is not the only method for justifying new research, but we contend it is among the best ones. "…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The methodology of this paper lies in the development of a question into a research puzzle, which requires asking "what is puzzling about how earlier research has described or explained this (allegedly puzzling) phenomenon?" Essentially, it requires one to ask a "why x despite y" or "how did x become possible despite y" (Gustafsson and Hagström 2018). Applied to the current subject, the puzzle is thus: How can BIM level 3 be implemented despite the normative framework hindering its use?…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over time, these issues erode public trust in legal institutions and hinder the judiciary's ability to provide timely and fair resolutions. The recognition of these shortcomings serves as a catalyst for introspection and the initiation of reforms to remedy inherent deficiencies (Gustafsson and Hagström, 2023). One of the primary motivations for judicial reforms is the urgent need to address the substantial backlogs that have historically plagued legal systems across the continent.…”
Section: Motivations For Judicial Reformsmentioning
confidence: 99%