Theoretical Implications of Empirical Models

Session Submission Type: In-Person Full Paper Panel

Session Description

The diverse papers on this panel share a common interest in formalizing the theoretical frameworks and assumptions that undergird empirical techniques commonly used in political science, but that have not yet been clearly articulated. These approaches unite formal models, social choice theory, quasi-experimental data, and survey design. Abramson et al. propose a survey design related to forced-choice conjoint experiments that allows researchers to directly measure how voters trade off candidate valence features (e.g. race, gender, and experience) with other attributes like ideology and electability. Tyson and Sun connect causal inference with a branch of formal theory that prioritizes the articulation of mechanisms, with an application to conflict studies. Montagnes et al. examine how survey design features affect the estimation of average outcomes conditional on membership in a particular subpopulation. Minaudier develops a formal model of campaigning to analyse what field experiments on canvassing can tell us about the equilibrium effects of large-scale campaigns.

Sub Unit

• Theme Panel

Cosponsor

• Division 51: Experimental Research

Chair

• Federica Izzo UCSD

Discussant

• Konstantinos Matakos King's College London

Individual Presentations

• Theoretical Implications of Empirical Models: An Application to Conflict Studies - Scott Tyson, University of Rochester; Jessica Sun, Emory University

• Ideology, Electability, and Valence - Scott Abramson, University of Rochester; Korhan Kocak, New York University Abu Dhabi; Asya Magazinnik, MIT

• Priming Self-Reported Partisanship: Implications for Survey Design and Analysis - Brendan Pablo Montagnes, Emory University; Zachary F. Peskowitz, Emory University; Kaylyn Jackson Schiff, Emory University

• Doors and Perceptions: Motivations, Beliefs, and Returns to Canvassing (Pre-Recorded) - Clement Minaudier, University of Vienna