A Case for Description

Descriptive research—work aimed at answering “who,” “what,” “when,” “where,” and “how” questions—is vital at every stage of social scientific inquiry. The creative and analytic process of description—through concepts, measures, or cases, whether in numeric or narrative form—is crucial for conducting...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPS, political science & politics Vol. 57; no. 1; pp. 51 - 56
Main Authors Holmes, Carolyn E., Guliford, Meg K., Mendoza-Davé, Mary Anne S., Jurkovich, Michelle
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, USA Cambridge University Press 01.01.2024
Subjects
Collaboration
Concept formation
Datasets
Definitions
Democracy
Descriptive research
Discipline
Fatalities
Hypotheses
Inference
Political science
Politics
Research Design
Researchers
Social sciences
The Profession
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Descriptive research—work aimed at answering “who,” “what,” “when,” “where,” and “how” questions—is vital at every stage of social scientific inquiry. The creative and analytic process of description—through concepts, measures, or cases, whether in numeric or narrative form—is crucial for conducting research aimed at understanding politics in action. Yet, our field tends to devalue such work as “merely descriptive” (Gerring 2012), subsidiary to or less valuable than hypothesis-drive causal inference. This article posits four key areas in which description contributes to political science: in conceptualization, in policy relevance, in the management and leveraging of data, and in challenging entrenched biases and diversifying our field.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1049-0965
1537-5935
DOI:10.1017/S1049096523000720