In the fields of national security and intelligence research is based on qualitative and quantitative methods and even though analysts depend on intuition and interpretation of facts, an analyst achieves rigor by defining variables, setting up tests to discern if a hypothesis proves true or not. Thus, if there is sufficient data a quantitative approach is warranted. This is especially true within the fields of criminal justice and international relations. All students, regardless of a program should challenges themselves this week to think about how some of these different approaches could be used address problems specific to their fields of study.
Quantitative methods are considered by some as the “more scientific” because this approach is data-driven and relies on numbers and statistical methodology; however, like qualitative methods, there are 4 requirements of any research approach and data analysis method:
(1) understanding a variety of data analysis methods,
(2) planning data analysis early in a project and making revisions in the plan as the project evolves.
(3) understanding which methods will best answer the study questions posed, given the data that have been collected; and
(4) once the analysis is finished, recognizing how weaknesses in the data or the analysis affect the conclusions that can properly be drawn. The research questions govern the overall analysis, of course.
The form and quality of the data determine what analyses can be performed and what can be inferred from them. As you continue to develop your research proposal, consider what approaches and data collection methods might be most useful if you were to operationalize those methods.
Select two articles from the list below and in two pages double-spaced (per article) address the following:
Format: You should have 1-inch margins on all 4 sides of your papers; your title page should include your name and date; you should use 12-point times new roman font throughout.
Things to keep in mind:
Avoid using the first person in formal writing and instead write with an academic voice throughout. Academic voice is usually written in the third person (he, she, it), not first person (I, we) or second person (you). Be consistent in voice and person. See Grammar Girl, “First, Second, and Third Person,” Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing, January 20, 2011, Furthermore, the academic voice avoids abbreviations, contractions, jargon, and slang. Even informal academic discussions are more formal than causal chat among friends.
The body of your work should be made up of no more than 20% of direct quotes.
As you proof read your assignment I encourage you to work with Belcher, Wendy Laura. 2009. “Editing Your Sentences” In Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success. Sage. This resource has a nice step by step process for enhancing your writing.
Upload your completed assignment to W6 Assignment using the filename: yourlastnameW6.doc.
Note: In the case of a broken link each of these articles can be found either within the APUS online library or on the open web.
Criminal Justice Articles
Parker, Karen F., Richard Stansfield, and Patricia L. McCall. 2016. “Temporal Changes in Racial Violence, 1980 to 2006: A Latent Trajectory Approach.” Journal of Criminal Justice 47 (December), 1-11.
Nix, Justin and Scott E. Wolfe. 2016. “Sensitivity to the Ferguson Effect: The Role of Managerial Organizational Justice.” Journal of Criminal Justice 47 (December): 12-20.
Collins, Rachael E. 2016. “Addressing the Inconsistencies in Fear of Crime Research: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Journal of Criminal Justice 47 (December): 21-31.
Mitchell, Meghan M., Kallee Spooner, Di Jia, and Yan Zhang. 2016. “The Effect of Prison Visitation on Reentry Success: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Criminal Justice 47 (December): 74-83.
Intelligence Studies Articles
Phillips, Matthew D. 2016. “Time Series Applications to Intelligence Analysis: A Case Study of Homicides in Mexico.” Intelligence and National Security 31, no. 5: 729-745.
Piazza, James A. 2017. “Repression and Terrorism: A Cross-National Empirical Analysis of Types of Repression and Domestic Terrorism.” Terrorism and Political Violence 29, no. 1: 102-118.
Marsden, Sarah V. 2016. “A Social Movement Theory Typology of Militant Organisations: Contextualising Terrorism.” Terrorism and Political Violence 28, no. 4: 750-773.
Agroskin, Dmitrij, Eva Jonas, and Eva Traut-Mattausch. 2015. “When Suspicious Minds Go Political: Distrusting and Justifying the System at the Same Time.” Political Psychology 36, no. 6: 613-629.
International Relations and Conflict Resolution Articles
Horowitz, M. C., & Stam, A. C. (2014). How prior military experience influences the future militarized behavior of leaders. International Organization, 68(3), 527-559. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1017/S0020818314000046 http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1690481493?pq-origsite=summon
Peksen, Dursun. 2016. Economic sanctions and official ethnic discrimination in target countries, 1950-2003. Defence and Peace Economics 27 (4): 480-502. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1080/10242694.2014.920219
Tarzi, S. M., & Emami, A. (2014). Developed vs. developing countries and international trade liberalization: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies, 39(1), 24-51. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1526125955?accountid=8289
National Security and Military Studies Articles
Kalyvas, Stathis N. 1999. “Wanton and Senseless: The Logic of Massacres in Algeria.” Rationality and Society 11, no. 3: 243-285.
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, Randolph M. Siverson, and Gary Woller. 1992. “War and the Fate of Regimes: A Comparative Analysis.” The American Political Science Review 86, no. 3 (September): 638-646.
Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman. 1992. “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.” Journal of Risk & Uncertainty 5, no. 4: 297-323.
Sprecher, Christopher. 2004. “Alliance Formation and the Timing of War Involvement.” International Interactions 30, no. 4: 331-347.
Morgan, T. Clifton. 1990. “Issue Linkages in International Crisis Bargaining.” American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 2 (May): 311-333.