Survey Research in International Political Economy: Motivations, Designs, Methods

Abstract

The use of surveys and survey experiments by international political economy scholars is increasing, adding to the ability to study a broad array of topics. In doing so, many scholars in international political economy draw on-and are contributing to-insights and arguments from American politics and comparative politics (Milner 1998), substantive fields with a history of using surveys and survey experiments. In this article, I review motivations for using surveys and survey experiments, the research designs, and analysis strategies in light of this issue's contributions. I contrast these motivations and their accompanying designs and discuss the pros and cons of ways to approach the data generated by these research designs. The goal of this commentary is to situate surveys and survey experiments-especially those within the special issue-within a larger discussion about research motivations, design, and analysis techniques. KEYWORDS international political economy, methods, research design, survey researchThe span of these articles and their relevance to international political economy (IPE) is remarkable. So how should we think about the motivations for a research design, the benefits and limitations of specific research design decisions, and their analysis techniques? MOTIVATIONS

Activist Disconnect: Social Movements, Public Opinion, and U.S. Military Bases in East Asia

“…As is common practice with question wording survey experiments, ours included two control conditions—a pure control that conveyed no text prior to our first outcome measure and a regular control that included a generic statement about U.S. military bases providing both benefits and detriments for local communities. Although we find no significant difference in attitudes toward U.S. military bases between the two control conditions, we present treatment effects with respect to both groups, in line with our preanalysis plan and standard recommendations in the methodological literature (Gaines, Kuklinski, & Quirk, 2007; Tingley, 2014, p. 447). Our treatment conditions begin with the generic statement about benefits and detriments from the regular control, followed by additional information about U.S. bases.…”

Self-interest versus sociotropic considerations: an information-based perspective to understanding individuals’ trade preferences

“…In recent years, survey-embedded experiments have emerged as methodologically superior to empirically test specific causal hypotheses (Morton & Williams, 2010;Mutz, 2011;Tingley, 2014). This study has embedded different information treatments (stimuli) in a survey questionnaire gathering information about the benefits of trade for the individual and/or for the country.…”

Personality traits and foreign policy attitudes: A cross-national exploratory study

“…Recent research seeks to disaggregate the foreign policy decision-making process and understand elite decision-making draws on survey data from mass public samples (cf. Kertzer, 2016;Tingley, 2014). Our results imply that variation in personality traits shapes broad orientations toward international politics, and in turn variation in foreign policy actions, even in the face of fixed material constraints (Gallagher & Allen, 2014).…”