{"id":1131,"date":"2025-03-04T20:32:53","date_gmt":"2025-03-04T20:32:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/connect.apsanet.org\/apsa2025\/?page_id=1131"},"modified":"2026-03-25T16:42:53","modified_gmt":"2026-03-25T16:42:53","slug":"pre-conference-short-courses","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/connect.apsanet.org\/apsa2025\/pre-conference-short-courses\/","title":{"rendered":"Pre-Conference Short Courses"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This year, Annual Meeting pre-conference short courses will take place on Wednesday, September 10, 2025, in Vancouver, BC, Canada. <\/strong>APSA pre-conference short courses are half- or full-day events that offer diverse professional development opportunities and allow attendees to connect with scholars from various backgrounds. Short courses are sponsored by APSA Organized Sections<\/a>, Related Groups, and other affiliated organizations. All short courses require pre-registration to attend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

APSA is offering pre-conference short courses as part of the in-person event format. All short course participants must<\/span> be registered for the Annual Meeting and have a badge before attending. Pre-conference short courses are an additional $25 registration fee<\/strong> to the general meeting registration. If you have already registered for the Annual Meeting and would like to add a short course registration, please contact meeting@apsanet.org<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Register here: pre-conference short courses<\/strong> \u00bb<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
SC01: Modern Causal Inference and Treatment-Effect Estimation Using Stata<\/strong><\/h6>\n
<\/div>
<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Half Day Short Course
<\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this workshop, we introduce the methods used to study causal relationships between variables when analyzing observational rather than experimental data. We present a variety of treatment-effect estimators for cross-sectional and panel-data structures and discuss the assumptions under which each estimator is appropriate. Throughout the workshop, we cover the conceptual and theoretical foundations of causal inference and demonstrate the methods with many practical examples worked using Stata. We emphasize the latest developments in causal inference that have been incorporated into the software.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We cover the estimation of average treatment effects (ATE), average treatment effects on the treated (ATET), and conditional average treatment effects (CATE), among others. We also discuss the estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects using difference in differences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After a discussion of the potential-outcomes framework and an overview of the parameters of interest, the workshop introduces the following treatment-effect estimators:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Cross-sectional data:
    a. Regression adjustment (RA)
    b. Inverse-probability weighting (IPW)
    c. Augmented IPW (AIPW)
    d. IPW regression adjustment
    e. Conditional average treatment effects (CATE)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Cross-sectional high-dimensional data:
    a. Treatment-effect lasso<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Repeated cross-sectional and panel data:
    a. Difference in differences (DID)
    b. Heterogeneous DID<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    All topics are discussed using a combination of theory and Stata examples.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Goals, Objectives, and Expected Outcomes<\/strong>:
    Participants will learn how to use Stata to obtain causal inference parameters, interpret their results, and obtain diagnostics to validate some of the model assumptions. Participants will also understand the theory behind the methods employed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Target Audience<\/strong>:
    Anyone interested in the latest developments in causal inference with a background in linear regression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Short Bio<\/strong>:
    Eduardo Garc\u00eda Echeverri is a Senior Econometrician at StataCorp LLC. He holds a PhD in Economics from the University of Rochester and a master\u2019s degree from Universidad de los Andes in Colombia. His research focuses on nonparametric and semiparametric methods in econometrics. At Stata, he produces documentation, develops webinars, and contributes to the development of new statistical features.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

    \n
    \n
    SC02: From Research to Action: Advancing Expert Witnessing in the Asylum Process<\/strong><\/h6>\n
    <\/div>
    <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
    \n

    Half Day Short Course
    <\/em>1:30pm – 5:30pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This half-day short course, which is supported by a grant from the APSA Centennial Center, will introduce political scientists to the ins and outs of providing country conditions expertise within asylum cases, as well as facilitate exchange on challenges and best practices when engaging in this work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Around the world, record numbers of people have fled their homes in search of safety. According to the UNHCR, displacement due to persecution, violence, and human rights abuses has reached an unprecedented 108 million people\u2014the highest level since World War II. In asylum proceedings, expert witnesses play an important role by providing crucial context about asylum seekers’ countries of origin. This expert knowledge helps ensure that asylum decisions are well-informed and grounded in detailed understanding of local political, social, and human rights conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Given their disciplinary training and country-specific expertise, political scientists are ideally suited to serve as country conditions experts\u2014but they may not be aware of the need for expert witnesses in asylum cases, or they may not know how to get started. Drawing on the collective experience of faculty who have served in over 150 asylum cases and featuring professionals who work directly in the asylum process, this workshop will equip political scientists to translate their expertise into action. Participants will learn about the immigration system and asylum process, understand the role of expert witnesses, and gain practical skills for preparing declarations, interacting with lawyers, asylum seekers, and adjudicators, and testifying at hearings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The workshop will also facilitate the development of a network for knowledge-generation and -sharing among scholars engaged in asylum work, addressing a critical need in the field. With record numbers of asylum seekers scheduled for individual merits hearings in coming years, this work speaks directly to questions of how political science can address contemporary crises and reimagine possibilities for action. Through expert witnessing, scholars can apply their research to support asylum adjudication while generating new insights about migration, human rights, and democratic institutions. This engagement with asylum cases provides a model for how political scientists can contribute to building more just and inclusive societies during times of global crisis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This short course is funded through an APSA Centennial Center Grant. The registration fee will be covered for the first 50 registrants.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

    \n
    \n
    SC03: The Politics of Public Labor<\/strong><\/h6>\n
    <\/div>
    <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
    \n

    Full Day Short Course
    <\/em>9:00am – 5:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Government work has doubled since 1960, both in the United States and elsewhere (Brady et al. 2020). Not only do public employees now account for a larger share of the labor force, they all but replaced private sector employees as the political leaders of contemporary trade union movements. Limited political research has assessed the impact of these changes. While economists and sociologists have developed robust research programs in the area of public employment, political scientists studying this topic are more fragmented. This short course aims to integrate the field by offering intensive feedback on participants\u2019 working papers, as well as by stimulating discussion on how to strengthen this area in the discipline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The short course aims to integrate scholars from diverse backgrounds, subfields, and career stages. Presenters include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • Christopher Chambers-Ju<\/strong> (Assistant Professor, UT Arlington), studying the effect of teachers\u2019 strikes on support for labor unions in Mexico.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Desmond King<\/strong> (Mellon Statutory Professor, Oxford), studying the relationship between race and the administrative state.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Isabel Perera<\/strong> (Assistant Professor, Cornell University), studying how the political influence of public sector unions accounts for a new form of \u201csupply-side\u201d policy feedback.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Nicholas Toloudis<\/strong> (Professor, The College of New Jersey), studying how the political strategies and policy preferences of teachers\u2019 unions change in relations to the governance structures of public education in the United States, France, and European Union.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Chas Walker<\/strong> (PhD Candidate, Boston University), studying the role of race in US public sector unionism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Steven White<\/strong> (Associate Professor, Syracuse University) , studying the political development of police unions\u2019 influence on US politics.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • Alan Yan<\/strong> (PhD Candidate, UC Berkeley), studying the effect of right-to-work laws on the US partisan balance.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

      Confirmed discussants include John Ahlquist<\/strong> (Associate Dean and Professor, UC San Diego), Alexander Hertel Fernandez<\/strong> (Associate Professor, Columbia), Mimi Lyon<\/strong> (Assistant Professor, Albany), and Kathleen Thelen<\/strong> (Ford Professor, MIT).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      As a short course, it also welcomes the participation of others, either as presenters or as discussants.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

      \n
      \n
      SC04: Sharing Your Science with the Media<\/strong><\/h6>\n
      <\/div>
      <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
      \n

      Full Day Short Course
      <\/em>9:00am – 5:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Many political scientists feel a duty to communicate with the public, but at the same time, they often feel intimidated by speaking with the media, lack confidence, or are concerned about facing hostile interviewers or publics. Namely, scientists often express their discomfort with interviews and their concerns about potentially being misquoted and misunderstood, which can act as a roadblock to engaging with the media. This is particularly true in the current political climate. Through presentations, discussions, hands-on activities, and mock interviews, this workshop will guide participants through the most important things to know about the media ecosystem and how to interact with it effectively as a source, making language choices that will make your science more accessible to lay audiences, developing messages and working them into responses to interview questions, how reporters find expert sources, and how to navigate and survive uncomfortable interview questions and situations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The workshop is presented by facilitators from SciLine, a program of the American Association for the Advancement of Science that connects scientists and journalists to bring scientific evidence to general audiences through news stories, and will pull from the lessons we\u2019ve learned from facilitating more than 5,000 interactions between those two groups.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

      \n
      \n
      SC05: The Disrupted World: Politics and Economics in Transition<\/strong><\/h6>\n
      <\/div>
      <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
      \n

      Full Day Short Course
      <\/em>9:00am – 5:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      As the global political and economic landscape experiences profound and continuous disruptions, understanding the underlying dynamics of these transitions has become critical for scholars in International and Comparative Political Economy. This pre-conference workshop, The Disrupted World: Politics and Economics in Transition<\/em>, will bring together emerging voices to explore the mechanisms, effects, and responses to global economic and political shifts. The workshop aims to foster an intellectually stimulating environment for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Workshop Structure<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The workshop will feature approximately 12 presentations organized into four thematic blocs, each addressing a key topic in political economy. These blocs will include three 15-minute presentations followed by discussant comments and an interactive audience Q&A. This format is designed to encourage rigorous yet collaborative engagement, providing presenters with constructive feedback to advance their research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The workshop is open to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows from diverse disciplinary backgrounds, including economics, political science, international law, and sociology. We have accepted rigorous research at various stages of development and employing diverse methodological approaches\u2014quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Thematic Focus Areas<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The workshop will address a broad range of International and Comparative Political Economy topics. As we have already selected the papers, we have tentatively opted for the following four clusters:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      • Distributional Consequences of Globalization and Democratic Politics<\/strong>: How can democratic governments balance the economic benefits of globalization with the political demand for greater social equity?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Trade and Global Value Chains<\/strong>: How are global supply chains adapting to increased economic nationalism, trade disputes, and technological innovation?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Foreign Investment and Economic Statecraft<\/strong>: What are the political determinants and consequences of shifting foreign investment flows and the rise of industrial policy?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Finance and Monetary Dynamics and the Housing Crisis<\/strong>: How are global finance and monetary systems adapting to crises, such as inflationary pressures and regional financial instability? How do the distributional consequences of globalization contribute to the housing crisis?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

        In line with the broader APSA 2025 theme, Reimagining Politics, Power, and Peoplehood in Crisis Times<\/em>, we have encouraged submissions that examine the politics of crises. This includes exploring how governments, firms, and societies respond to challenges like economic recessions, geopolitical tensions, climate change, housing crisis and public health emergencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Objectives<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        1) Engagement with Critical Issues<\/em>: Provide a platform for research addressing pivotal political and economic transformations.
        2) Mentorship and Feedback<\/em>: Connect starting and advanced PhD students and post-doctoral fellows to foster collaboration and supportive networks.
        3) Inclusive Networking Opportunities<\/em>: Promote dialogue and exchange among scholars from diverse backgrounds and methodological traditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Expected Outcomes<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        This pre-conference workshop will enrich the APSA 2025 conference by generating new insights into contemporary political economy challenges, fostering interdisciplinary dialogue, and advancing the work of emerging scholars. By situating the discussions in the context of ongoing global crises, the workshop will offer a forward-looking perspective on the opportunities and challenges shaping the world. Together, we will reimagine the role of International and Comparative Political Economy in understanding and navigating the disrupted world.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

        \n
        \n
        SC06: Fifty Years of British Politics: Celebrating the 50th Anniversary of the BPG<\/strong><\/h6>\n
        <\/div>
        <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
        \n

        Full Day Short Course
        <\/em>9:00am – 5:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The United Kingdom seems to confront perpetual crises \u2013 inflation, low growth, strains on public finances, challenges of immigration, and rising social unrest. Governments seem incapable of getting a handle on these problems, leading public discourse to become more extreme and the trust and confidence in democratic institutions to erode. Ironically, this characterization of British politics may have been just as appropriate in 1975 as it is in 2025. Yet the UK has transformed vastly in the past fifty years, with radical re-imaginings of its dominant political ideologies, representative institutions, and social compacts with its citizens. Presenters in this short course will reflect on the transformation of the UK and its people, politics, and place in the world since the founding of the British Politics Group in 1975, and will consider what the next 50 years might hold.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

        \n
        \n
        SC07: Young Elected Leaders: Perspectives on Age and Elected Leaders<\/strong><\/h6>\n
        <\/div>
        <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
        \n

        Half Day Short Course
        <\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Within the current political climate, concerns about candidate and elected official ages have gained prominence in political discourse. This pre-conference short course will cover cutting-edge methodological approaches to best capture public sentiments regarding age in American Political Leaders. Specifically, we will be hosting informative panels on utilizing observational and experimental techniques for age-based evaluations. The overall goal is to showcase new research, highlight best practices, and enable researchers to apply their best skills to studying this wide-ranging phenomenon. In addition, we will present a workshop on newly available data on state legislative and congressional elected official ages across multiple election years, provided by the Young Elected Leaders Project at the Eagleton Institute of Politics’ Center for Youth Political Participation. For the data workshop, we will be utilizing R Markdown and encourage participants to bring their laptops. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Conference Structure (9\/10\/2025) 9:00 am – 1:00 pm <\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        • Panel 1 – Candidate Age in Observational Studies<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Data Workshop – Unlocking State Legislative and Congressional Age Data<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Panel 2 – Candidate Age in Experimental Studies<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Closing Idea Session<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
          \n
          \n
          SC08: Diversity and Solidarity in Challenging Times: Soc Movements and Inclusion<\/strong><\/h6>\n
          <\/div>
          <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
          \n

          Half Day Short Course
          <\/em>1:30pm – 5:30pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          How do groups riven by inequality and difference maintain the solidarity necessary for coordinated political action? This question becomes ever more pressing as movements face internal challenges of intergroup conflict and external challenges related to backlash, changing economic conditions, and other environmental factors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The proposed project seeks to bring political scientists and sociologists together to address this question in a one-day workshop organized by the Diversity and Inclusion in Social Movements Research Collaborative. The members of this group comprise political scientists and sociologists at a range of career stages, from early career researchers to established scholars who are leaders in their various disciplines and subfields. The workshop will feature a panel of presentations on the state of the literature as well as responses and feedback from leading researchers. The project will produce a book as well as several public-facing presentations offering a variety of possible pathways to solidarity, for example, offering case studies of actual solutions activists have devised to address challenges of diversity, equity, and inclusion in social movements.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

          \n
          \n
          SC09: Comparative Historical Analysis<\/strong><\/h6>\n
          <\/div>
          <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
          \n

          Full Day Short Course
          <\/em>9:00am – 5:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Comparative historical analysis (CHA) encompasses a methodological tradition that has been widely used for studying problem-driven, macro-historical questions. Like historians, CHA uses the past to formulate research questions, describe complex social processes, and generate new theoretical insights. And like social scientists, CHA compares those patterns to formulate generalizable and testable hypotheses. CHA builds a bridge between these two research traditions and developed a heterodox methodological toolbox.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


          The course introduces four elements from CHA\u2019s toolbox:
          1) Exploration and Description:<\/em> Figuring out what happened is essential for identifying new research questions or updating existing ones. CHA explores by emphasizing description, typologizing, and other tools to identify patterns. These patterns in turn generate new research questions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


          2) Data Visualization:<\/em> CHA draws on visualization techniques to make historical patterns visible. These strategies involve among others developmental typologies, periodizations, line graphs, serial scatterplots, trees, or chronologies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


          3) Temporal Thinking<\/em>: Problem-driven research often is historical because it is driven by sudden changes (i.e. economic crisis, pandemics, wars) or slower moving trends (i.e. demographic, cultural). CHA employs a refined temporal vocabulary to adequately describe historical processes and cope with the causal complexity that is necessary to explain these processes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


          4) Theorizing:<\/em> Theory plays a central role in CHA\u2019s effort to cope with causal complexity. Theories facilitate a close dialogue between existing theories and new inductive insights. And this dialogue updates existing theories. CHA uses theories particularly to identify confounders that existing theories have overlooked. It also employs causal diagrams to translate theories into transparent data gathering strategies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The instructor for this session is Marcus Kreuzer<\/strong>. He is a Professor of Political Science at Villanova University and has been working on the origins of European and post-communist party systems . He is the author of The Grammar of Time: A Toolbox for Comparative Historical Analysis <\/em>(Cambridge, 2023) and has published widely on qualitative methods. He has taught CHA courses at the IQMR, ECPR, and MethodsNet summer schools.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

          \n
          \n
          SC10: Media Mastery: Sharing Your Voice with the Public<\/strong><\/h6>\n
          <\/div>
          <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
          \n

          Half Day Short Course
          <\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          This half-day workshop will serve as an introductory media training session for scholars and experts who wish to prepare for interviews with popular media outlets, from print and digital publications, to podcasts and radio, to YouTube and TV. Publicist Nanda Dyssou will offer case studies and invaluable insights on strategies she\u2019s used to effectively promote the work of public intellectuals through the media. The session is geared towards APSA members of all backgrounds who want to master the art of media engagement and boost their public profiles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The workshop will cover the following topics, along with any others that APSA believes its members would like addressed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          1. Strategies for preparing for interviews across multiple media platforms<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          2. Case studies on successful book, research, and public persona promotion through media<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          3. Insights for marginalized voices to enhance public recognition<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          4. How to inspire and connect with audiences through effective media engagement<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

            Dyssou will begin with a short presentation, then move on to hands-on exercises and personalized guidance based on attendees\u2019 own projects. By integrating narrative crafting, media engagement strategies, and collaborative partnerships, this workshop aims to equip APSA members with the knowledge to engage new audiences and amplify their broader impact. It is ideal for those looking to improve their media presence and connect with a broader audience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Workshop Leader<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Nanda Dyssou<\/strong> is the Founder and Lead Publicist of Los Angeles-based Coriolis Company, where she and her team specialize in crafting and executing media strategies that bring academic or niche books to wider audiences. Known for her dedication to BIPOC, LGBTQ+, and other historically underrepresented authors, she is proud to have been called “the author whisperer” by publishers for her ability to keep nervous debut authors focused. Nanda has a keen awareness of how publishers, universities, and literary organizations connect readers to ideas that matter, and prioritizes working closely with these groups to ensure that her clients’ works become part of the public conversation. In 2024, Dyssou held book promotion or media training workshops at the Association of African American Life and History and the National Women\u2019s Studies Association conferences and for the UCLA Gender Studies department, the Du Bois Forum Fellows, and the Association for Asian Studies. In early 2025, she will lead webinars for the African American Intellectual Society and the American Library Association\u2019s Toward Inclusive Excellence campaign.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Coriolis Company is a Los Angeles-based boutique agency providing book publicity, marketing, author branding, and literary services to professors, public intellectuals, and thought leaders. Coriolis is the only publicity agency in the United States specializing in promoting the work of BIPOC, LGBTQ+, and otherwise marginalized academics.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC11: Teaching and Researching Trust with Large Scale Twitter Datasets<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            What is the problem?<\/strong>
            People reading social media posts tend to believe what they already believe or disbelieve what they already disbelieve. They may never bother to verify the facts or the source. Taking even a few seconds to verify a statement or the amplifying source might have a surprising effect. How can we encourage students to take those few extra seconds? We have put together a framework called TrustDefender that might make verification both educational and fun.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            What is TrustDefender?
            <\/strong>TrustDefender is a free information literacy and digital citizenship platform. We recognize the importance of digital-literate citizens. This platform could help some first-time voters. We hypothesize that having students take a few extra seconds to dig into the digital footprint of a Tweet will impact trust. Given this is my fourth decade of research, I know the results are going to be unpredictable with unintended consequences. Such is the history of information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            What is the background story on TrustDefender.net?
            <\/strong>We are updating DiscoverText, a free web-based scientific research instrument, to explore gamification. Scholars use DiscoverText to search, filter, cluster, annotate, and machine-classify text data. Diverse scholars have published more than 600 research papers using these five pillars of text analytics. Specific game-oriented modifications to the annotation platform launched as TrustDefender on August 27, 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Is TrustDefender a game?
            <\/strong>We are not sure yet. In recent meetings with a variety of scholars and gamification experts, the question was not resolved. Some of the measurement tools and methods were originally designed in 2007 as open source software and later developed as DiscoverText starting in 2010, and patented in 2016 under the title \u201cSystem and method of classifier ranking for incorporation into enhanced machine learning\u201d. The core annotation mechanism loads data automatically and allows annotators to record observations with a single keystroke.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            We sought to understand the challenge of crowdsource annotation (ex., speed, consistency, domain knowledge, inter-rater reliability, gold standard validation, and \u201cCoderRank\u201c) each of which have elements amenable to leaderboards, novel rankings, and competition. We have come to see Twitter itself as a live game platform. User behavior backs this up. Players across the political spectrum seek to game the system to earn status, influence, and power. We are trying to adapt, test, and possibly modify the rules of the game known as Twitter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            What is the data?<\/strong>
            We are using existing and new custom Twitter datasets ranging from tens of thousands to several million curated Tweets. Some of the historical data include #metoo, #BLM, Trump, Biden, Flynn\/QAnon, digital soldiers, AmericaFirst, Canadian elections, the Canadian trucker convoy, Canadian migration, and other important windows into the trust conundrum in North American politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            What is the goal of creating TrustDefender?
            <\/strong>One goal is to better understand how DiscoverText can be modified to have default, ready-to-play games, as well as the traditional framework where it is simply a flexible tool, like a spreadsheet. Leaders of the games will also be able to create new tasks, codes, rules, parameters, code books, assignments, peer groups, and focus the students. Much of the content of the games can be created by the professors or teams of students.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Can you create new custom datasets using summer and fall queries?
            <\/strong>Yes, we have worked with academics regularly since 2010 to acquire custom datasets relevant to the themes central to their classrooms and research. We also provide free training.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            What are some examples of games?
            <\/strong>There will be archetypal game formats such as the deductive \u201clive, deleted, suspended\u201d and hybrid deductive\/inductive \u201ctrust, don\u2019t trust, need more info\u201d games. The core of this experiment is what students will see when they indicate that they \u201cneed more info\u201d having been unable to trust or distrust a Tweet at first glance. The drill down will include adaptable options to quickly review the user profile page, as well as the follower and following lists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            More fully inductive games such as \u201cbot, troll, or citizen\u201d are possible. Small adaptations of the existing crowdsource software will make the labeling task more game-like in TrustDefender. Students will train or play on default games out-of-the-box that are easy to launch, but professors will also be able to adapt the framework with very minor effort to define parameters for their own games.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            How long will it take to set up?
            <\/strong>There will be a very simplified onboarding process for creating new tasks or games, loading student lists, connecting students as peers within a class, and sending out tasks as homework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            How long will a task or game take?
            <\/strong>That is up to the professor. We envision a wide variety of labeling tasks as short as 2-3 minutes or as long as it takes. Certain tasks produce conceptual saturation in a few minutes. Others require the classic deeper dive.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC12: The Logic and Best Practices of Process Tracing (QMMR A)<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This short course covers the underlying logic and best practices of process tracing, which is a within-case method of developing and testing causal explanations of individual cases. We begin by exploring the philosophies of science behind process tracing: scientific realist and interpretive. Next, we highlight, define and provide examples of the central concept process tracing measures – causal mechanisms – noting their difference from causal effects and interpretive understandings of causation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The core of the short course is then an introduction to the logic and best practices of process tracing, both its \u2018front end\u2019 data collection and \u2018back end\u2019 data analysis. For data collection, we consider the typical ways in which process tracing gathers evidence on the observable implications of causal mechanisms, including archival work, document analysis of secondary sources, various field methods (interviews, political ethnography, ethnography), and surveys. In reviewing these methods, we consider the inferential and ethical challenges each raises when accessing process-tracing data. On data analysis and process tracing, we begin by considering the informal manner in which many scholars proceed; more important, we survey the growing number of techniques (e.g., Bayesian logic, directed acyclic graphs) that allow us to conduct the process tracing analysis more formally and transparently. We finish this part of the course by articulating a set of best practices for conducting process tracing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            After this overview of the philosophical, causal and data logics of process tracing, the course introduces participants to two different types. We begin with the Bayesian approach\u2014comparing rival hypotheses; evaluating the inferential weight of evidence by \u201cmentally inhabiting\u201d the world of each hypothesis and asking which one makes the evidence more expected; updating prior views about which hypothesis is more plausible; and fostering transparency through systemization. We then turn to interpretive process tracing\u2014inductive approach; practice logic; establishing local causation; transparency through ethical self-reflection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Throughout the course we will emphasize best practices and applications to exemplars of process tracing research. While the examples are primarily drawn from international relations and comparative politics, the methods we discuss are applicable to all the subfields of political science, to sociology, economics, history, business studies, public policy, and many other fields.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            During the final part of the course, we will divide into two discussion groups to further explore the material covered, one led by Checkel for those who have general questions on process-tracing approaches to data collection, mechanisms, ethics, and related concerns, and one led by Fairfield for those interested in the Bayesian approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This morning short course is designed as an introduction that can usefully be taken in conjunction with Qualitative Bayesian Reasoning (QMMR B) or Interpretive Process Analytics (QMMR C) in the afternoon. These three courses are complementary and can also be taken separately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Instructor Bios:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Jeffrey T. Checkel<\/strong> is a professor at the European University Institute, where he holds the Chair in International Relations. His research interests include international relations theory, international institutions, civil war, identity\/identity-formation and qualitative methods. At EUI, he offers seminars on international relations theory, international institutions, qualitative methods, and philosophies of social science. Most years since 2014, Checkel has co-taught the foundational APSA short course on The Logic and Best Practices of Process Tracing<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Tasha Fairfield<\/strong> is an associate professor at the London School of Economics. Her methodological research examines the Bayesian logic of inference in qualitative social science, for which she received the 2024 APSA-QMMR David Collier Mid-Career Achievement Award. She has been teaching workshops and courses on this material since 2016 with IQMR, APSA, Statistical Horizons, and other forums. Her substantive research interests include the politics of policymaking, redistribution, business power, inequality, and climate change.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC13: Qualitative Bayesian Reasoning (QMMR B)<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>1:30pm – 5:30pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This course introduces the Bayesian foundations of qualitative research, building on \u201cSocial Inquiry and Bayesian Inference: Rethinking Qualitative Research\u201d (Fairfield & Charman, CUP 2022). The material complements the morning short course on process tracing led by Checkel and Fairfield, but each course can be taken independently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The first part of this course introduces the basic principles of Bayesian reasoning with the goal of leveraging common-sense understandings of inference and improving intuition when analyzing qualitative evidence. We begin with the general principles of Bayesian inference, which involves updating prior views about which explanation is more plausible when we learn new information. We explain the importance of working with rival hypotheses and discuss how to formulate well-constructed explanations to compare. We then elaborate practical procedures for evaluating the inferential import of evidence by \u201cmentally inhabiting\u201d the world of each hypothesis and asking which one makes the evidence more expected. Examples and group exercises using real-world qualitative evidence will illustrate how this process works.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The second part of the course turns to the iterative nature of qualitative research, which involves going back and forth between theory revision, data collection, and data analysis. We draw new insights through a continuous process of analyzing evidence, refining theory and asking new questions, revisiting the evidence in hand, and deciding what kinds of additional evidence to collect. This style of research contrasts with the linear-deductive model that is the norm across much of political science. We will examine the Bayesian foundations that justify iterative research and discuss Bayesian safeguards against two common problems that may arise: confirmation bias and ad-hoc hypothesizing, where explanations are too tightly fit to the data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Note: This course does not require any familiarity with Bayesianism, probability theory, or logic. The only technical skills that will be assumed are basic arithmetic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Instructor Bio:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Tasha Fairfield<\/strong> is an Associate Professor at the London School of Economics. Her methodological research examines the Bayesian logic of inference in qualitative social science. She is the co-author, with A.E. Charman, of Social Inquiry and Bayesian Inference: Rethinking Qualitative Research (CUP 2022) and the 2024 recipient of the APSA-QMMR David Collier Mid-Career Achievement Award. She has been teaching workshops and courses on this material since 2016 with IQMR, APSA, Statistical Horizons, and other forums. Her substantive research interests include the politics of policymaking, redistribution, business power, inequality, and climate change.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC14: Interpretive Process Analytics (QMMR C)<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>1:30pm – 5:30pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This short course outlines the logic and best practices of interpretive process analytics. This includes a wide array of processual methods, ranging from interpretive process tracing, to practice tracing, to following techniques. It provides students with advice and examples to enable them to use these methods in their work. The course does not require any prior background in interpretive epistemology or training in interpretive analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            We begin, meta-theoretically and conceptually, by building on the relational turn in ontology and on practice theory in sociology and political science. For us, relationalism is particularly important, as it is built on an understanding of the social world where the analytic focus is squarely on process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The core of the course then examines how we can empirically measure and access social mechanisms, social practices, and the categories and concepts that feature in following techniques. In terms of methods, we range broadly, from ethnography and political ethnography, to interpretive interviews and document analysis, to practice tracing. In all cases, we consider the practical, data quality and ethical challenges of using a particular method. This sets the stage for articulating an emerging set of best practices for interpretive process analytics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            We conclude this part of the course by sketching the cutting-edge challenges for interpretive process analytics: (1) expanding its understanding of process to capture better insights from following methods; and (2) adding ethical reflexivity to how we go about accessing-measuring-seeing \u2018process.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The course\u2019s final hour is devoted to small-group breakout sessions, where participants workshop how they plan to use interpretive process methods in their research. Are there meta-theoretical, data access, data collection, data analysis or ethical issues with which they are grappling? The instructor and fellow students will offer constructive advice on how best to address such challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Instructor Bio:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Jeffrey T. Checkel<\/strong> is a professor at the European University Institute, where he holds the Chair in International Relations. His research interests include international relations theory, international institutions, civil war, identity\/identity-formation and qualitative methods. At EUI, he offers seminars on international relations theory, international institutions, qualitative methods (introductory and advanced), and philosophies of social science. Most years since 2014, Checkel has co-taught the foundational APSA short course on The Logic and Best Practices of Process Tracing<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC15: Fieldwork in Challenging Contexts and Times of Heightened Global Tension (QMMR D)<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            How can researchers effectively and ethically navigate the challenges of conducting fieldwork in politically sensitive and logistically complex contexts? Scholars have extensively documented the difficulties of field research in developing countries and authoritarian regimes, particularly during periods of heightened global tension. These challenges include navigating restrictions on access to data and sites, managing ethical dilemmas related to power imbalances and participant vulnerability, and addressing risks to the safety of both researchers and participants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This short course will explore the challenges of conducting fieldwork in countries and regions such as China, East Asia, India, Latin America, the Middle East, and Russia. Participants will learn strategies for collecting archival, qualitative, quantitative, and experimental data in contexts where logistical and ethical challenges are magnified by political constraints. Topics will include mitigating security risks, managing researcher and participant well-being, collecting and triangulating different types of data, including digital fieldwork, and addressing positionality and reflexivity in research processes. The course will also examine how global and local political tensions influence research design, access, and outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The three-hour session will feature a general overview and topical presentations addressing key themes in conducting fieldwork in challenging contexts. Each presentation will be followed by an interactive discussion, allowing participants to ask questions, share experiences, and gain practical insights into the ethical and methodological challenges of conducting fieldwork in complex settings. By the end of the course, participants will develop a deeper understanding of how to design and conduct rigorous and ethical field research in diverse and challenging environments. This short course is co-sponsored by the Comparative Politics Section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Instructor Bios:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Nermin Allam<\/strong> is Associate Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University-Newark. She is a nonresident fellow in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and visiting fellow at the Kellogg Institute for International Studies at the University of Notre Dame. Allam\u2019s research focuses on gender politics and social movements in the Middle East and North Africa. Allam\u2019s work has appeared in Perspectives on Politics<\/em>, Mobilization<\/em>, Politics & Gender<\/em>, PS: Political Science & Politics<\/em>, among other journals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Abby C\u00f3rdova<\/strong> is Associate Professor in the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame, and concurrent faculty in the Department of Political Science. She directs the Kellogg Institute for International Studies\u2019 Notre Dame Eliminating Violence against Women (E-VAW) Lab. Her research examines intersections between organized crime, militarization, and impacts on women\u2019s political participation in the context of Latin America. She relies on a mixed method approach, combining qualitative data with quasi-experimental and experimental designs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Roselyn Hsueh<\/strong> is Professor of Political Science at Temple University. She is the author of Micro-institutional Foundations of Capitalism: Sectoral Pathways to Globalization in China, India, and Russia<\/em> (Cambridge, 2022), China\u2019s Regulatory State: A New Strategy for Globalization<\/em> (Cornell, 2011), and book chapters and scholarly articles in such journals as Comparative Political Studies<\/em> and Governance<\/em>. She is a two-time recipient of the Fulbright, including the trans-regional and multi-country Fulbright Global Scholar Award, among other fellowships for research and international fieldwork.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC16: Planning for Real: Bringing Your Whole Self to the Field (QMMR E)<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>1:30pm – 5:30pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Traditional political science guidance approaches field research from the perspective of a supposedly neutral, unmarked researcher [i.e., a hegemonic white male] . Doing so does researchers a disservice by overlooking and underestimating the variability of bodies and positions that researchers actually carry everywhere they go. These varied bodies and positionalities are not ancillary to the planning and doing of fieldwork but influence every aspect of it. Researchers have to make decisions about which fields are safe, under what contexts, and for whom, whether, what, and what type of access they can likely secure, and more, and they should take their embodiment and likely positionalities into account in doing so. Researchers also need to take their caregiving needs and responsibilities; personal comfort, health, and safety; and financial status into account in planning and conducting field research. Meanwhile, the researcher is not the only decision-maker of note. Potential research gatekeepers\u2019 and participants\u2019 willingness to engage with researchers is influenced by multiple variables, including their own assessments of the researcher. These assessments stem from the researcher\u2019s strategic self-presentation as well as the respondents\u2019 levels of comfort and respect the type\/category of people they understand the researcher to be. We take up these concerns in this interactive workshop session, not only sharing our experiences insights and expertise, but also creating space for participants integrate their whole selves into planning and adapting field work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Presenters<\/strong>: Natasha Behl, Ethel Tungohan, Robin L. Turner, & Ashlee Christoffersen<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC17: Studying Causal Mechanisms Using In-Depth Case Studies (QMMR F)<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>1:30pm – 5:30pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The study of causal mechanisms (aka causal processes) is ubiquitous in the social sciences. The promise of process-focused research using in-depth case studies is that we can gain a better understanding of how things work and under what conditions using actual cases instead of using controlled comparisons across cases (for example experimentally manipulating treatments to gain knowledge about mean causal effects). However, the potential gains of process-focused research have not been fully reaped in the social sciences because of the tendency to reduce causal processes to simple one-liners that do not unpack what is actually going on in a case (e.g. that grievances are linked to democratization through social mobilization). By not unpacking process theoretically, we are unable to evidence how they work empirically because empirical material is only processual evidence when we can identify the theorized part of a process that it is evidence of.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Inspired by the mechanistic turns in fields such as medicine, policy evaluation and policy studies, the first session of the course discusses what \u2019good\u2019 processual explanations can look like in the social sciences. The course introduces a conceptual language of episodic theorization that attempts to capture the causal structure of a process through making explicit what causal roles interactions between actors play in different phases of a process. While the particularities of processes as they play out in individual cases will always be unique, cross-case processual comparisons are made possible through the analytical simplification in the form of theorizing the episodes and their causal role that make up the causal structure. The final session discusses practical applications, including what and how we can \u2018generalize\u2019 from processual case studies, and how process-focused research can be used as an adjunct method to improve social science experiments in designing the experiment and interpreting the data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Recommended readings and schedule<\/span>:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Session 1
            <\/strong><\/em>Inspired by the mechanistic turns in fields such as medicine, policy evaluation and policy studies, the first session of the course discusses what \u2019good\u2019 processual explanations can look like in the social sciences. The course introduces a conceptual language of actors, activities and linkages that enables us to move beyond one-liner theories to theorize the inner workings of causal processes, while at the same time not getting lost in the gory details.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Session 2
            <\/em><\/strong>The second session presents the developing standards in the natural and social sciences for what constitutes ‘good’ mechanistic\/processual evidence, and how we can evaluate it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Session 3
            <\/em><\/strong>The final session discusses practical applications, including what and how we can \u2018generalize\u2019 from processual case studies, and how process-focused research can be used as an adjunct method to improve social science experiments in designing the experiment and interpreting the data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Suggested readings will be made available on Google Drive before the course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            About the Instructor:
            Derek Beach<\/strong> is a professor of Political Science at Aarhus University, Denmark, where he does research on research methodology and European integration. He has authored articles, chapters, and books on research methodology, policy evaluation, international negotiations, referendums, and European integration, and co-authored the book Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines<\/em> (2019, 2nd edition, University of Michigan Press). He has taught case study methods at numerous workshops and Ph.D. level courses throughout the world, and conducted evaluations at the national and international level. He was an academic fellow at the World Bank\u2019s Independent Evaluation Group in Spring 2022. He is an academic coordinator of the Methods Excellence Network (MethodsNet).<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

            \n
            \n
            SC18: Learning for Democracy: Lessons in Power and Persuasion<\/strong><\/h6>\n
            <\/div>
            <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Half Day Short Course
            <\/em>9:00am – 1:00pm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Humanity\u2019s biggest and most difficult problems are political: domestic violence, discrimination, inequality, global heating, environment, trade policy, you name it. Yet there are still too few opportunities for people to develop practical political understanding, strategies and skills – unlike business, now the biggest subject in higher education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This interactive workshop covers a range of tried and tested methods for teaching non-partisan, practical politics including how to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n