Course Outline

Overview

• Introduction to outline and expectations
• Discuss the nature of inference in science
• Discuss what environmental social science is

Required Readings

Trochim. “Foundations.” (All subsections.)

Barrett, C.B. 2021. “On design-based empirical research and its interpretation and ethics in sustainability science.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118(29): e2023343118.

Additional Materials

Mahoney, J. 2010. “After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research.” World Politics 62(1): 120-147.

Overview

• Continue discussion of what environmental social science is
• Consider our role and goals as environmental social scientists

Required Readings

Ferraro, P.J., Agrawal, A. 2021. “Synthesizing evidence in sustainability science through harmonized experiments: Community monitoring in common pool resources.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118(29): e2106489118.

Hein C.J. et al. 2018. “Overcoming early career barriers to interdisciplinary climate change research.” WIREs Climate Change e530.

Additional Materials

Schmidt, M., Soentgen, J., Zapf, H. 2020. “Environmental humanities: an emerging field of transdisciplinary research.” GAIA 29(4): 225-229.

Overview

• Consider what a theory is and what it is good for
• Discuss how to come up with research questions
• Discuss the balance between theory- and solution-driven research

Required Readings

Watts, D. 2017. “Should social science be more solution-oriented?” Nature Human Behaviour 1: 0015.

Purdon, M. 2015. “Advancing Comparative Climate Change Politics: Theory and Method.” Global Environmental Politics 15(3): 1-26.

Akerlof, K.L. et al. 2022. “The Growth and Disciplinary Convergence of Environmental Communication: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Field (1970-2019).” Frontiers in Environmental Science 9: 814599.

Slough, T. 2022. “Phantom Counterfactuals.” American Journal of Political Science (Online first).

Overview

• Discuss the importance of measurement to making valid inferences
• Explore different types of measurement-focused studies
• Discuss interim research design project (focus on research question)

Required Readings

Trochim. “Measurement.” (Construct Validity, Reliability, Levels of Measurement.)

Dunlap, R.E. et al. 2002. “New Trends in Measuring Environmental Attitudes: Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale.” Journal of Social Issues 56(3): 425-442.

von Stein, J. 2020. “Democracy, Autocracy, and Everything in Between: How Domestic Institutions Affect Environmental Protection.” British Journal of Political Science 52(1): 339-357.

Ratledge, N. et al. 2022. “Using machine learning to assess the livelihood impact of electricity access.” Nature 661: 491–495.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Additional Materials

Golden Kroner, R.E. et al. 2019. “The uncertain future of protected lands and waters.” Science 364(6443): 881-886.

Geertz, C. 1973. Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture in The Interpretation of Cultures, Basic Books. pp. 310-323.

First checkpoint due Sep 20

Overview

• Introduction to the concept of sampling and its role in scientific inference
• Identify potential points of deviation from representative sampling
• Introduction to “large-n” survey research
• Discuss the use of survey research in environmental social science research

Required Readings

Trochim. “Sampling.” (All subsections.)

Squire, P. 1988. “Why the 1936 Literary Digest Poll Failed.” Public Opinion Quarterly 52(1): 125–133.

Howe, P.D. et al. 2015. “Geographic variation in opinions on climate change at state and local scales in the USA.” Nature Climate Change 5: 596-603.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Overview

• Introduction to various types of non-probability sampling approaches
• Compare probability and non-probability sampling schemes with respect to scientific inference
• Continue discussing the use of survey research in environmental social science research
• Discuss interim research design project (focus on sample selection)

Required Readings

Heckathorn, D.D., Cameron, C.J. 2017. “Network Sampling: From Snowball and Multiplicity to Respondent-Driven Sampling.” Annual Review of Sociology 43:101-119.

Koubi, V. et al. 2022. “Climate events and the role of adaptive capacity for (im-)mobility.” Population and Environment 43: 367–392.

Exadaktylos, F., Espín, A., Brañas-Garza, P. 2013. “Experimental subjects are not different.” Scientific Reports 3: 1213.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Additional Materials

Goel, S., Salganik, M.J. 2010. “Assessing respondent-driven sampling” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(15): 6743-6747.

Overview

• Establish baseline knowledge of the causal inference framework
• Discuss the concept of comparability in making inferences
• Practice identifying and critiquing assumptions in applied causal inference research
• Explore different types of experimental studies with full control of treatment assignment and administration
• Discuss the uses of various types of experimental designs in environmental social science

Required Readings

Trochim. “Research Design.” (All subsections.)

Kimmel, K. et al. 2021.“Causal assumptions and causal inference in ecological experiments.” Trends in Ecology & Evolution 36(12): 1141-1152.

Gromet, D.M., Kunreuther, H., Larrick, R.P. 2013. “Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110(23): 9314-9319.

Zhang, B. et al. 2018. “Experimental effects of climate messages vary geographically.” Nature Climate Change 8: 370–374.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Additional Materials

Shadish, W.R. 2010. “Campbell and Rubin: A primer and comparison of their approaches to causal inference in field settings.” Psychological Methods 15(1): 3–17.

Byerly, H. et al. 2018. “Nudging pro-environmental behavior: evidence and opportunities.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 16(3): 159-168.

Bernedo, M., Ferraro, P.J., Price, M. 2014. “The Persistent Impacts of Norm-Based Messaging and Their Implications for Water Conservation.” Journal of Consumer Policy 37: 437-452.

King, G. et al. 2011. “Avoiding Randomization Failure in Program Evaluation, with Application to the Medicare Health Support Program.” Population Health Management 14(S1): S11-S22.

Sakagami, T,. Ohta, M. 2010. “The effect of visiting zoos on human health and quality of life.” Animal Science Journal 81(1): 129-134.

Second checkpoint due Oct 11

Overview

• Discuss the link between noncompliance in experiments and instrumental variables for observational studies
• Identify plausible instrumental variables in common environmental social science questions
• Discuss the potential for the instrumental variable approach in environmental social science research

Required Readings

Imai, K. 2005. “Do Get-Out-the-Vote Calls Reduce Turnout? The Importance of Statistical Methods for Field Experiments.” American Political Science Review 99(2): 283-300.

Gong, X. et al. 2020. “Internet use encourages pro-environmental behavior: Evidence from China.” Journal of Cleaner Production 256: 120725.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Additional Materials

Kikuta, K. 2019. “Postdisaster Reconstruction as a Cause of Intrastate Violence: An Instrumental Variable Analysis with Application to the 2004 Tsunami in Sri Lanka.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 63(3): 760-785.

Overview

• Review the concept of comparability in making inferences
• Identify different types of assumptions about comparability between units or samples
• Discuss scenarios that allow for reasonable assumptions about comparability

Required Readings

Hazlett, C., Mildenberger, M. 2020. “Wildfire Exposure Increases Pro-Environment Voting within Democratic but Not Republican Areas.” American Political Science Review 114(4): 1359-1365.

Kousky, C., Michel-Kerjana, E.O., Raschky, P.A. 2018. “Does federal disaster assistance crowd out flood insurance?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 87: 150-164.

Wuepper, D., Borrelli, P., Finger, R. 2020. “Countries and the global rate of soil erosion.” Nature Sustainability 3: 51-55.

Talhelm, T., Dong, X. 2024. “People quasi-randomly assigned to farm rice are more collectivistic than people assigned to farm wheat.” Nature Communication 15: 1782.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Overview

• Discuss threats and opportunities posed by spillover or interference to research
• Explore the concept of complexity in social scientific research
• Discuss interim research design project

Required Readings

Leifeld, P., Schneider, V. 2012. “Information Exchange in Policy Networks.” American Journal of Political Science 56(3): 731-744.

Nilsson, A., Bergquist, M., Schultz, W.P. 2017. “Spillover effects in environmental behaviors, across time and context: a review and research agenda.” Environmental Education Research 23(4): 573-589.

Holtz, D. et al. 2020. “Interdependence and the cost of uncoordinated responses to COVID-19” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(33): 19837-19843.

D’Alberto, R. et al. 2024. “The environmental and socioeconomic impacts of the Italian National Parks: Time and spillover effects across different geographical contexts.” Global Environmental Change 86: 102838.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Additional Materials

Deschenes, O., Meng, K.C. 2018. “Quasi-experimental methods in environmental economics: Opportunities and challenges.” in Handbook of Environmental Economics vol.4, pp. 285-332.

Chen, T.H.Y. 2019. “Statistical inference for multilayer networks in political science.” Political Science Research and Methods 9(2): 380-397.

Kwan, M. 2018. “The Limits of the Neighborhood Effect: Contextual Uncertainties in Geographic, Environmental Health, and Social Science Research.” Annals of the American Association of Geographers 108(6): 1482-1490.

Third checkpoint due Nov 1

Overview

• Revisit the question of how case selection factors in the scientific method
• Consider how replication factors into the scientific method

Required Readings

Blatter, J., Blume, T. 2008. “In Search of Co-variance, Causal Mechanisms or Congruence? Towards a Plural Understanding of Case Studies.” Swiss Political Science Review 14(2): 315-356.

Plümper, T., Troeger, V.E., Neumayer, E. 2019. “Case selection and causal inferences in qualitative comparative research.” PLOS ONE 14(7): e0219727.

Fariss, C.J., Jones, Z.M. 2018. “Enhancing Validity in Observational Settings When Replication is Not Possible.” Political Science Research and Methods 6(2): 365-380.

*Student-selected readings TBD.

Additional Materials

King, G. 1995. “Replication, Replication.” PS: Political Science & Politics 28(3): 444-452.

Nielsen, R.A. 2016. “Case Selection via Matching.” Sociological Methods & Research 45(3): 569-597.

Overview

• Discuss various ethical considerations in social scientific research
• Complete Human Subjects Ethics Training required for ethical review
• Discuss whether social science has a “responsibility” to society (if so, what?)

Required Readings

Human Subjects Ethics Training (CITI Program). See instructions at the GMU Office of Research Integrity and Assurance website.

Asiedu, E. et al. 2021. “A call for structured ethics appendices in social science papers.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118(29): e2024570118.

Haggerty, K.D. 2004. “Ethics Creep: Governing Social Science Research in the Name of Ethics.” Qualitative Sociology 27, 391-414.

Fiesler, C., Proferes, N. 2018. “Participant” Perceptions of Twitter Research Ethics.” Social Media + Society 4(1).

Desposato, S. 2018. “Subjects and Scholars’ Views on the Ethics of Political Science Field Experiments.” Perspective on Politics 16(3): 739-750.

Additional Materials

Dattalo, P. 2010. “Ethical Dilemmas in Sampling.” Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics 7(1).

Presentation draft due Nov 22

Overview

Buffer session

Overview

Research design presentations and peer feedback

Peer feedback due Dec 6 Final projects due Dec 15