Lecture (2) Notes: Induction, Deduction, Actors, and Theories in International Relations

Flashcards cover core concepts from the lecture on reasoning methods (induction vs. deduction), actor identification, IR theories (realism, constructivism), hypothesis testing, data challenges, and case-based reasoning in international relations.

What is the distinction between inductive and deductive reasoning as discussed in the notes?

Induction builds general explanations from observed data (often broad with multiple possible explanations); deduction tests the underlying logic and produces falsifiable hypotheses.

How can an 'actor' be framed in international relations according to the notes?

As an individual leader or as a representative of a state, a movement, or a broader multinational/societal force.

Why is it important to identify and classify the actor in IR?

To understand how interests and actions are shaped by the actor's role and to distinguish between individuals, states, movements, and institutions.

What do realist theories typically prioritize?

Security and power (national interests) shaping behavior and outcomes.

What alternative do constructivists offer regarding interests?

Interests can be shaped by ideas, norms, and identities, not just material concerns like security or economics.

What does 'adaptive reasoning' imply about outcomes?

Even with strategic effort, outcomes are not guaranteed; actors may achieve only partial gains and face risk.

What is a hypothesis and why is falsifiability important?

A testable prediction; falsifiability allows data to potentially disprove the theory and advance knowledge.

What challenge arises when applying induction to studying war and conflict?

Defining what counts as war and deciding which events qualify, including data selection and unit definitions.

Why should researchers articulate why they focus on certain facts when collecting data?

To make the research design transparent and justify how variables will be measured (operationalization).

What does the notes say about alliances and their outcomes?

A stronger state backing a weaker ally is common, but alliances do not always produce the expected outcomes.

What is meant by 'case fit' in evaluating theories?

Assessing whether a particular case actually matches the theory's assumptions before applying its predictions.

How would different theories interpret events like a leader's death?

Different theories would view the same event through different lenses, leading to different policy implications.

Do all theories make explicit predictions, and how can this vary?

Some theories explicitly predict outcomes; others are older or more abstract and predict in aggregate terms (types of actors or cases).

How should one approach questions about defining and categorizing 'war' in data collection?

Explicitly define what counts as war and decide thresholds for inclusion to ensure consistent analysis.

What does Koch’s metaphor say about institutions and growth?

Trees grow on crooked paths; institutions help keep development on a straighter course.

Why is defining data and categories early in research important?

To ensure consistent analysis, support falsifiability, and clarify what is observed and measured.