1

SO YOU HAVE TO WRITE

A RESEARCH PAPER

L et’s be honest. When many students look at a new course syllabus and view
the assignments, seeing that the professor has assigned a research paper typi-
cally brings one of two reactions. A first possible response is one of horror. Many
students dread the assignment because they don’t know how to write a research
paper. Students with this viewpoint may drop the course because of this require-
ment, be panicked about it all semester, or just ignore the assignment until the
last moment (as if it might somehow go away) and then turn “something” in.
An alternative response is, “No problem, I’ll just write a report on a topic I’m
interested in.” Neither reaction is productive, nor are the strategies mentioned
for dealing with the dreaded assignment appropriate. The goal of this book is to
teach you how to write a research paper so that you will (1) not respond in either
fashion, (2) realize why the typical reactions are so problematic, (3) turn in a
superior effort, and (4) even enjoy yourself (at least at some points) in the research
and writing process.
Admittedly, writing a research paper is intimidating for a number of reasons.
First—and this point is very important to remember—few secondary schools
and institutions of higher learning bother to teach how to write one anymore.1
Yet many faculty assign research papers, as if knowing how to write one were
an innate ability that all college students possess. Research paper writing, how-
ever, requires a set of skills that need to be developed. These skills can be taught
and learned, as well as used throughout a college career.2 Moreover, mastering
the ability to conduct research and write the paper will help you in numerous
other ways in school and beyond. While this claim might seem far-fetched to
you now, generations of students have confirmed that assertion both in written
reflections about the experience as well as in their performance in other classes
and p­ ostgraduate endeavors.

1
2   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

Second, research paper writing is so daunting because the task seems

unbounded. Where do you start? What is a good topic? How do you know where
to look for information? What does the text of such a paper look like? How
do you know when you are done? This concern with boundaries is obviously
related to the general ignorance about what constitutes a research paper. But
another problem here is recognizing that writing, whether for a research paper
or some other assignment, is discipline specific.3 Faculty often forget to make
that point explicitly, and students typically conceive of writing skills as consist-
ing of only grammar, usage, and paragraph construction. While those skills are
certainly important and ones that this book will also help you hone, they are not
the only ones students need to develop in order to write a good political science
research paper. Political science has its own conventions (which are similar to
those of the other social sciences and in some instances even related to those in
the humanities and natural sciences) for paper writing that students must learn.
However, just because you earned an A in your required first-year English class
does not mean that you are ready to garner an equally excellent mark on your
political science research paper. You not only must learn to speak a new language
(the vocabulary of political science), but must adopt the conventions, values, and
norms of the discipline.4 Here again, faculty members have so successfully inter-
nalized these norms that they forget that students need instruction. This book
addresses that deficiency by teaching you to write a research paper in political sci-
ence, demystifying the structure and the process. Developing this set of writing
skills will be useful to you in a number of ways: not only will it help you to write
more effectively in this discipline, but it will allow you to see more easily the con-
ventions that apply to other fields of study. In addition, once you know the style
and format for any subject, your reading comprehension skills in that discipline
improve, and understanding even the densest academic tome will become easier.
Why? Because scholars use this structure themselves, and once you know what to
expect from the form of an article or book, you will be better able to distinguish
the argument from the evidence, the logic from the information, or the normative
claim from the underlying principles.
Third, knowing how to write a research paper is something that will be use-
ful to you throughout your life. You might find that statement funny (or even
ridiculous), thinking to yourself that you are writing research papers only to get
your degree, but thereafter, you intend to be working in the corporate or non-
profit world. (My apologies to those of you out there who see an academic career
in your future.) Well, if you were amused by this third claim, you need to stop
laughing and recognize that you likely will spend much of your career w ­ riting,
and a good portion of that writing will be persuasive communication that
(1) surveys a number of opinions or studies on a particular problem, (2) assesses
logically the strengths and weaknesses of the various approaches, and (3) uses
evidence from a case or cases of particular interest to you, your boss, and/or your
clients to determine what the best approach to this problem is for your purposes.
In effect, then, you will be performing the types of analysis involved in writing
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   3

research papers for your living, no matter what you do. So why not learn how
to do it now and develop the aptitude, so that you will be in a better position in
your future?
Some of you might be skeptically reading this introduction, believing that as
more advanced students of political science, you have already developed the skills,
knowledge, and ability to write an excellent research paper. With no disrespect
to your accomplishments, the experiences of scores of faculty from around the
country at the best institutions suggest that even the most capable readers of this
book have something to learn. Never before have you been asked to put your
ideas together in such a systematic way in order to undertake a rigorous assess-
ment of the literature, assert a thesis, create a fair test for evaluating evidence
related to your contention, perform systematic analysis, and present your results
in a ­standard fashion. So, even if you think you have little need for this book,
I counsel you to read on. You are not the first to have doubts, and virtually all of
your predecessors have come away finding value in these pages.
Others of you might simply not want to “waste your time” reading a book
about writing, as well as inquiry, structure, and methods. In some ways, this book
is like the often-overlooked instructional manual that comes along with your
newest electronic device. Most of us prefer to ignore that text and play around
with our toy to figure it out on our own. While this approach might work for
you to use your new phone adequately, how many of you really want to earn an
adequate grade? If your professor is assigning this book, she or he wants to see
you incorporating its advice in your own writing and will penalize you if you
do not. I can guarantee you: while the advice here is presented in an accessible
fashion, it is not something that most students “just know” and can figure out on
their own. Moreover, an instructor doesn’t make decisions about texts lightly, as
faculty recognize your constraints—the amount of money that is appropriate to
spend on course resources and the number of pages you can read in a week—and
your instructor has decided that this book will help you arrive at the desired end
point of writing a high-quality research paper in political science. So, respect your
faculty member’s knowledge and assessment of your needs. Besides, the chapters
are relatively short and the reading is easy. Your time investment will not be enor-
mous, but the payoff will be great.
Importantly, the returns will not be confined to this particular course, as
the book will help you acquire skills that will empower you in multiple ways.
By learning how to write the research paper, you develop expertise—skills of
­reading comprehension, writing, research, and analysis—that will enable you to
do well or better in all of your classes. Moreover, these are all techniques you
will use in your future career, whether you are an attorney, a CEO, an activist,
a public servant, a politician, a businessperson, or an educator. Such profession-
als are frequently asked to evaluate information and provide recommendations.
For instance, imagine you are working at the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services and are asked to determine the impact of dismantling the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also called Obamacare or the ACA,
4   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

on young adults, aged 22 to 26. At the outset, you will to need to find the legisla-
tion itself and then define what impact means for this population of Americans.
You also will need to justify your definition and explain from where and why you
selected your information to evaluate the effect on this group. How have they
benefited over the past years? What assumptions might you have to make about
who will go without care in the near future if their coverage is lost? What uncer-
tainties do you have regarding your conjectures? Once you have some data, you
must analyze them and then write up your findings in a form that will impress
your boss. You will learn all of the skills required to do an excellent job on such
a project in this book.

WHAT IS A RESEARCH PAPER?

A FEW HELPFUL METAPHORS
Most students think that a research paper in political science is a long, descriptive
report of some event, phenomenon, or person. This idea is a dangerous miscon-
ception that focuses on determining facts only. True, today, with the frequency
of charges of “fake news” and recognition that some groups and individuals seek
to confuse and misinform people, “real” facts are more important than ever,
and the idea of “good” facts is a highly contentious topic. Scholars of meth-
odology and the philosophy of science explain that true facts are often elusive
because researchers interpret what they see or because they report only what they
deem important, knowingly or unknowingly, failing to provide a more complete
­picture.5 While we will return later in the text to the topics of data collection and
combating our pre-existing inclinations, the problem I seek to underline here is
one that characterizes too many papers: conceiving of them as “data dumps” or
all the information you can find on a particular topic. Descriptive reporting is
only one element of a political science research paper. It is an important part, and
having a chance to learn about politically relevant events, persons, or phenomena
is probably why you are a political science major. But knowing about politics is
not being a political scientist. For political scientists, details are important, but
only if they are the “right” ones, related to either the logics or the norms you are
exploring or the precise evidence required to sustain or undermine an argument.
Facts for the sake of facts can be boring, confusing, or distracting.
So, if a research paper is not a “report” or a lengthy description, what is it?
Two metaphors help explain the balance you should seek for your desired end
point (an excellent paper). The first is that of a court case. In writing your research
paper, you are, in essence, presenting your case to the judge and jury (readers of the
paper). While you need to acknowledge that there are other possible explanations
(e.g., your opposing counsel’s case), your job is to show that both your preferred
logic and the evidence supporting it are stronger than any competing perspective’s
framework and its sustaining information. Interesting details that have nothing to
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   5

do with the particular argument you are constructing can distract a jury, give your
opponent an opportunity to undermine your argument, and annoy the judge.
Superior lawyers lay out their cases, connecting all the dots and leaving no pieces
of evidence hanging. All the information they provide is related to convincing
those in judgment that their interpretation is the correct one.
If you find the analogy of the courtroom too adversarial, think of your paper
as a painting. The level and extent of detail depend on both the size of the can-
vas and the subject to be painted. Too few details in a landscape can make it
boring and unidentifiable, whereas too many in a portrait can make the subject
­unattractive or strange. The goal here is to achieve the “Goldilocks” or “just
right” outcome.6
With respect to the process of researching and writing, I will use two addi-
tional metaphors throughout this book to help you (1) maintain the appropriate
long-term perspective on the project (the marathon) and (2) know exactly what
you need to do as you proceed through the paper (the recipe). Like running a
­marathon, the research paper is the culmination of great efforts. Just as the typi-
cal person cannot expect to get up on the morning of a race, go to the starting
line, and run for more than twenty-six miles, a student needs to go through
preparatory steps before completing a research paper. While runners stretch,
train, get the right nutrition and rest, and prepare mentally for sometimes years,
months, and days before the big race, students need to practice their writing and
develop their theses, create plans for evaluating those contentions, find the right
kinds of information, evaluate the data, and work on presenting their claims and
the evidence as accurately and effectively as possible. All of these tasks require
time and energy. Only with adequate preparation do the marathoner and the
student finish the race and the paper successfully.
While not all of us are likely to run a marathon, everyone who reads this
book will write a research paper. My point in writing is to show you that if you
­follow the advice spelled out here, you will not only finish your paper but turn in
something of which you feel proud. Too often I have seen students rushing at the
end just to get their papers done, without really caring about quality. Their feel-
ings are at times understandable. They didn’t know how to approach the project,
haven’t asked for or received any guidance, and are having a totally unsatisfying
time working on their research paper. When this is the case, not only is the end
result poor, but the exercise itself is actually a failure as an assignment.
To avert such negative outcomes, this text serves as a kind of cookbook, with
a recipe (literally) at the end of each chapter that suggests the supplies and steps
needed to tackle most effectively that part of the paper. For some of you and in
some sections of the text, these recipes might seem a bit simple, as they set out
the basics. When that is the case, like any experienced cook, you should feel free
to modify, adding the flourishes that might fit your tastes. Don’t be too quick,
however, to discount your need for the basic framework. Creating a satisfying
final product will only result with close attention to the fundamentals; the recipe
provides those essentials for you.
6   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

In addition, this textbook comes with an online companion site at https://

edge.sagepub.com/baglione4e, which includes many resources designed to help
you master the materials presented so that you can write an excellent paper. Most
chapters have corresponding handouts or guides, as well as exercises for practicing
the skills that are the subject of the chapter, calendar reminders, and checklists
that you can customize (based on the recipes) to serve as rubrics that clearly state
exactly what you need to accomplish. Flashcards on the site provide definitions of
the key terms appearing in italics throughout the book.
The most important insights of this guide to research paper writing (and ones
you would do well to internalize) are that you can have a rewarding and satis-
fying learning experience if you devote time to the process and recognize that
you have something to learn from this book, regardless of how many political
­science courses you have already taken. Key is conceiving of the research paper as
consisting of smaller, definable tasks. Each of those jobs can be accomplished on
its own, and the parts can then be assembled and reworked to create a coherent
and significant whole. In effect, then, the tasks are like the marathoner’s efforts
to prepare before a race or a cook’s steps to create a delicious multicourse meal.
Each performs on the appropriate day but succeeds only after much preparation.
In fact, continuing with the running analogy, I am asking you to internalize
the moral of the fable of the tortoise and the hare: slow and steady will win this
race. While some people have natural talent (whether as runners or as writers
and researchers), individuals finish marathons and write research papers because
they are determined, diligent, and skilled. The hare may be the more naturally
gifted and the faster runner, but the tortoise industriously persists throughout
the course to win the race. Be the tortoise!7 Work on your paper slowly but surely
throughout the writing period, and you will produce a fine final product.
Finally, I ask you to adopt a mix of humility and efficacy throughout the
project. All successful researchers and writers receive an enormous amount of
feedback on their projects, and sometimes those reactions mean having to rethink
and redo work that the author thought was completed. Such news can be discour-
aging for some, but a can-do attitude (and the recognition that tough feedback
is normal and leads to a better outcome) keeps the researcher moving forward,
addressing issues and knowing that the final product will be finer because of
those criticisms. Moreover, that feedback is a sign of respect and belief in what
your project can be; criticisms are not personal but designed to help you and your
research reach their full potential.

WHAT RESEARCH PAPER

WRITING ENTAILS
This book seeks to teach you the basics of writing a research paper in political
science. Each chapter is devoted to a particular section of that project and the
skills you need to develop to make that part a good one. The whole effort can be
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   7

broken down into eleven distinct but interrelated tasks,8 which map into differ-
ent sections of the paper as specified in Table 1.1. I also suggest a twelfth—the
presentation with an abstract (paragraph description of the project)—because
many of you will have to present your project and because figuring out how to
best share your work with an audience and talking about it prior to your turning
it in, in my experience, aids students in producing a higher quality final product.
In addition to these tasks, Table 1.1 provides a relative timetable because institu-
tions use different-length terms (semesters, trimesters, and quarters), and some
students using this book might be writing theses of longer duration. By setting
out deadlines now, I am underlining the notion that you cannot write a research
paper in a matter of days or hours. Moreover, while I stress that you frequently
will be rethinking your drafts, Table 1.1 underlines that you need to put ideas
on paper. The deadlines, however, are provisional, and you should look to your
instructor’s specific guidelines as you work on your project.
Each of the following chapters will identify precisely what you need to do to
write the different sections of a paper. In the text that follows you will find instruc-
tions and examples of actual student efforts. At the end of every chapter, I will
provide both a practical summary to guide you through accomplishing the goals
and a recipe designed to make your tasks crystal clear. Please r­ emember, research
paper writing takes time: to develop a question, find appropriate sources, read and
understand them, write, think, and plan your research, conduct it, reflect on its
significance, and finally, revise and edit it. While the task chart makes the process
appear to be linear—you work through one task, complete it, and then move on
to another—do not be fooled: the quality of your writing improves as the clarity
of your ideas do. A better picture of how you proceed is not a straight line but a
spiral whereby you are constantly looping back, adding insights, information, and
sophistication because you have rethought and sharpened what you have under-
stood and written before. A guiding assumption here is that your paper benefits
from reconsideration and iteration, and by coiling (picture a spring) back through
some ideas while you are also pushing forward, you make progress toward com-
pleting your goal. The spiraling back gives you a qualitative bounce forward, as
with that spring. To stay in one place to perfect that section might give you a
polished early part of your paper, but those efforts won’t lead to a finished prod-
uct, which is a key goal. So, get started, work steadily, follow the deadlines your
professor provides for finishing each section, and do not be ashamed to rethink
and change earlier thoughts. Keep thinking of that spiral, and remember, “First
thoughts are not best thoughts. They’re just first.”9
Essential to springing forward is having some work to reconsider. Thus, this
book asks you to begin thinking and writing as soon as possible. This recom-
mendation may seem counterintuitive. “How can I write when I am still learn-
ing about a subject?” most students ask. The response is that writing is part
of the thinking process, and you cannot make adequate intellectual advances
without putting your ideas on paper (or in the cloud) at the outset. By the end
of the ­process, you will have a draft that looks very different from the first
8   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

one you wrote, but that final version will be a product of the thinking and
learning you did throughout the entire project. This book encourages (and
in fact demands) that you write your research paper in pieces, beginning with
the first substantive parts of the paper and revising as you proceed. Insisting
on writing from the outset makes clear a distinction that most students don’t
recognize: revising and editing are different processes. Revising entails rethink-
ing and major rewriting, whereas editing consists of fixing grammatical errors
and format mistakes and varying word choice. We all know the importance of
correcting those silly errors, but many of us aren’t aware of just how important
rethinking and reconsidering our ideas are. In fact, ask any researcher and you
will find that she or he is constantly drafting, and that the redrafting process is
primarily concerned not with editing but with perfecting the argument, sharp-
ening the concepts, amassing better evidence, and adapting the structure to
best suit the researcher’s purposes. Most of the time writers revise, although

TABLE 1.1 ■ Research Paper: Tasks to Be Accomplished, Sections,

and Suggested Calendar

Sections/ Suggested
Tasks Assignments Calendar

(1) Develop a “good” topic or, more Annotated At the outset,

accurately, a good Research Question and Bibliography refine over the
find excellent, related scholarly sources. first third

(2) Identify, classify, explain, and Annotated By the end of the

evaluate the most important scholarly Bibliography first third, add
answers to that Research Question, and Literature sources, revise
(3) assert a thesis. Review ideas throughout
the process,
having a polished
Literature
Review with a
thesis by the
midpoint

(4) Assert a clear Thesis with its Thesis or Model By the end of the
constituent claims or develop a Model and Hypothesis first half of the
and Hypothesis that follow directly from course, sharpen
the argument. your argument
and assertions
throughout

(5) Revise and (6) edit. All sections Throughout, with

an intense effort
in the last phase
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   9

(7) Plan the study, with attention to Research Design About midway
defining and selecting appropriate to two thirds
cases and methods for analysis, through
creating usable operational definitions
of concepts and strategies for their
knowing values, identifying data
sources, developing instruments for
generating data (if necessary), and
explaining methodology. In addition,
justify this plan and recognize its potential
flaws.

(8) Evaluate the thesis or hypothesis Analysis and Start about two
across the chosen cases; present Assessment thirds of the way
evidence in effective ways so that you through (earlier
and the reader can easily follow why if possible)
you have reached your judgments on
the applicability of your argument for
your cases.

Write (9) a Conclusion that reminds Conclusion Final phase

the reader of the findings, discusses Introduction
why these results emerged and where Title
else they might be applicable, and
suggests paths for future research;
(10) an Introduction that introduces
the reader to the issue and question
inspiring you, asserts a clearly stated
thesis that answers that query, and
provides an overview of the paper; and
(11) a title that conveys your argument
and your findings in a brief and
inviting way.

(12) Create an abstract and presentation. Abstract Final phase

While these two elements are often Presentation
not required, they can be enormously
beneficial. The abstract is a paragraph
summary of the whole project that
appears on papers or posters presented
at conferences. The presentation
highlights the research you have done,
important choices you have made, and
your findings, with special attention
to the “packaging.” Both inspire a
holistic look at the project, aiding the
final revisions.
10   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

those revisions might be inspired by apparent micro-level problems that mask

the bigger conceptual ones. The e­ diting actually comes at the very end when
there is little time left to make the draft b­ etter in a macro way. Thus, like a
researcher, revising throughout the process will be essential for you to create the
excellent finished product you seek.

BLUEPRINT OF THE BOOK

In the paragraphs that follow, I will briefly explain the contents of each chapter of
the book so that you can have an overview. I recommend that you read this now
to gain a better general understanding of the research paper–writing process. If
you like, come back to these discussions prior to reading each chapter as a way to
help you focus on the main tasks to be accomplished in that section.
In chapter 2, we take up the challenge of determining a good Research
Question (RQ). Posing a question that is interesting and important to you, schol-
ars, policy makers, and the average citizen is the key to a good choice. As you
will see, coming up with an interesting query is one of the hardest and most
important parts of the project. It sets the stage for the whole research paper. As we
consider what makes a compelling question, we will note the diversity of kinds of
research in which one may be engaged as a political scientist. At this point, you
will also meet four students whose interests and research topics will reappear in
different places of the book. Excerpts of their efforts included throughout the text
give you examples of how others like you have handled the distinct tasks involved
in writing a research paper.
After identifying an RQ, you are ready to look at how others, namely ­scholars,
have answered similar queries.10 In chapter 3, you begin work on the second phase
of your project: determining and understanding the academic debate. At this
point, you need to discover how experts answer your RQ in both its general
and specific forms. You will begin this process by working on the Annotated
Bibliography and, if you like, using some source management software to help
you keep track of your materials. In chapter 3, you will learn about finding good,
scholarly sources—both books and articles—and using these works to lead you to
others. In addition, I will introduce you to a variety of citation forms and examine
the difference between paraphrasing and plagiarizing, as well as discuss other
common problems students have integrating the work of others into their papers.
At this early stage, sources are good ones if they provide answers to your RQ and
lead you to other researchers or sources of data related to your question; your goal
here is to uncover the commonalities and differences in the works of scholars who
are interested in your query. By the end, you should be grouping the arguments
of your books and articles into schools of thought—common answers to the RQ
that are united by a similar approach, such as having a certain perspective on
your issue of interest, pointing to a particular factor as the key cause, or sharing
a methodology.
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   11

Then, in chapter 4, you continue the process of finding, summarizing, and

categorizing excellent scholarly arguments by preparing a Literature Review (LR).
This is the first section of the paper you actually write; what you have done in the
Annotated Bibliography is create the framework, notes, and rough draft for the LR.
This section presents the different scholarly answers to your RQ and assesses their
strengths and weaknesses. You typically conclude your LR with a thesis, your pre-
ferred answer to the RQ.
All research benefits from very careful thinking about the concepts being
investigated and the argument asserted. Chapter 5 asks you to take a careful look
at the thesis and divide it into its constituent parts so that you can be sure that
you are making a nontrivial claim. Asserting an argument that is not obvious
and debatable can be a challenge, but the experts can point you toward them.
That’s the reason for the great attention you give to the literature. While carefully
considering their argument, some students will note that their contention makes
an a­ ssertion about the logical connection between developments, policies, and
events or asserts a mutually constitutive relationship between factors. In those
cases, writers seek to uncover the multiple sub-claims that underpin the thesis.
For other types of research, which rests on a correlational or causal argument, the
thesis must be developed further to guide you through the rest of the project.
Chapter 5 then helps you translate such an argument into a model and a hypoth-
esis. A model is a kind of flow diagram that identifies the cause(s)11 and effect(s)
as concepts and asserts graphically that X → Y (where X leads to Y). While the
model helps you focus on the key factors you will need to study, it does not
specify exactly how they are related. Does Y increase if X decreases? Because you
cannot tell from the model, you need the hypothesis. The hypothesis identifies
the ways in which these factors are related and is typically stated as, “the more of
X, the less of Y,” if you are positing a negative relationship between two continu-
ous variables. (If you were expecting a positive relationship, the sentence would
read, “the more of X, the more of Y”).12 Although not all students will have to
write the Model and Hypothesis section, they may benefit from the discussion
of concepts, theses, sub-claims, models, and hypotheses contained in chapter 5.
Before proceeding further, chapter 6 acknowledges that all good writers take
an enormous amount of time to revise and edit their work. You will too. While
this placement of a discussion on revising and editing midway through the
book might initially seem strange, the timing reflects a typical break in many
­course-based research projects. You likely have to turn in a literature review and
­thesis/argument/hypothesis to your professor when your project is still incom-
plete. Thus, chapter 6 gives you advice at this in-process stage on how to revise
and edit, while recognizing that you still need to write, read, think, and research a
good deal more and that an excellent final product requires your continual atten-
tion. You must check to make sure that each section accomplishes what it should,
that the paper is well written and has no silly typographical, grammatical, or
spelling errors, and that you have followed all of the formatting instructions your
professor has specified. Chapter 6 provides details on revising and editing, and
12   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

to be successful, you should return to its advice prior to turning in subsequent

drafts. Placing this discussion here ensures that you have already encountered it
before the end of the project, when students can be too tired to want to consider
seriously what revising and editing entail.
Once you have a sense of what you want to assert and which factors are essen-
tial in your argument, you are about halfway through this project, at the equiv-
alent of mile 12 in this marathon. Chapter 7 walks you through writing the
Research Design (RD), which is your research plan and your justification for it.
In this section, you design your evaluation of your thesis or test of your hypoth-
esis, and this undertaking is multifaceted. Here you determine what information
or which set of cases you need to study to conduct a fair assessment of your claim.
You also explicitly state how you will translate the concepts into identifiable or
sometimes measurable entities. Locating sources and data is important now too,
and you will see how the kind of information you need at this stage is very dif-
ferent from what you relied on earlier. Finally, you explain exactly what you will
consider to be “good” information and how it will help you evaluate your thesis.
In some cases, you may even discuss how you will generate data, for example, by
identifying how you will know which values your concepts take on or providing
a sample survey if you plan to administer one.
Throughout this section, you acknowledge any weaknesses and profess any
compromises you had to make in designing your project, such as difficulties in
finding the best case, determining more precise measures for a factor, or obtain-
ing the data you wanted. As you will see, designing a perfect project is virtually
impossible. Thus, every researcher must make tough choices and explain both
why these decisions are warranted and what their potential effects are. If you have
good reasons, you understand the possible drawbacks, and the problems are as
limited as possible, your instructor will be willing to allow you to proceed.
In his classic textbook on methodology, W. Phillips Shively noted with
tongue in cheek that political science is not rocket science. Natural scientists and
­engineers have verifiable physical laws that have been shown to hold and describe
the situations in which they are interested, as well as instruments that can pre-
cisely measure the phenomena they are investigating. In political science, we have
few laws, difficulty translating key concepts into measurable entities, and trouble
collecting or getting access to good data. Thus, as Shively noted, political science
is not rocket science—it’s much harder!13
In chapter 8, you learn how to analyze and assess the hypothesis. Using the
plan you developed in your RD, you evaluate the values of your concepts across
your case(s) to assess how well the logic and/or data support your contention. For
noncausal arguments, does the weight of the evidence support your contention?
For correlational or causal papers, do the data confirm your hypothesis? How can
you best convey your information to show your reader why you have reached your
conclusions? This is the part of the paper about which students are most excited;
it is also what most students conceive of (prior to learning what a research paper
really is) as the only important section. However, as I hope to show throughout
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   13

this book, the Analysis and Assessment (of the argument) can’t stand alone and
wouldn’t be as good without this previous work. It makes sense and carries weight
only after you have performed the other tasks. Moreover, by surveying the litera-
ture, developing a thesis and potentially a Model and Hypothesis, and carefully
designing the research, you are in a better position to convince people to engage
with your work (because you have explained why it is important and how your
paper is contributing to the debate) and write a focused and convincing assess-
ment of the evidence, principles, and/or logic that can sway a reader to hold the
same view that you do.
Once you have determined how well your thesis reflects reality, you are ready
to wrap up your paper. Using the running analogy, you are at mile 20 here, done
with the hard part, and now all you need is the stamina to complete the race.
Chapter 9 provides instructions to help you finish the two essential bookends
for your project—your Introduction and Conclusion—and assists in revising
your title. Perhaps surprisingly, you turn to the Conclusion first, because you
need to know what you are concluding when you write the overview in your
Introduction. Just like the marathoner, you cannot simply give up in the last few
miles, limp to the finish line, and feel satisfied. You need to complete the race/
paper strongly, with an effective Conclusion that ties the whole project together,
reminds the reader of what you have achieved, explains why these accomplish-
ments are important, considers both the limits of the research and whether this
project provides insights that are applicable to other situations, and poses ques-
tions for future research. This section is particularly important if you believe
that the compromises you had to make in the RD had a negative impact on your
findings. If appropriate, you should explain your continuing confidence in your
hypothesis, as well as discuss what you have learned about the choices you made
and what might be more productive paths to pursue. Remember, regardless of
whether your thesis was supported or your hypothesis was confirmed, rejected,
or the jury is still out, if you have proceeded in the fashion recommended, you
should be pleased with your findings. The whole point is to learn something in
the research process, not to be right. That statement is so important that I am
going to repeat it: your initial assertion does not have to be correct in order for
you to have a successful research paper. Instead, you need to proceed sensibly
and carefully through the process and analyze the arguments creatively and the
information honestly, while writing clearly. A good process and hard work lead
to a terrific final product.
Upon completing the Conclusion, you turn to the Introduction and then
to devising an excellent title. A good Introduction communicates the question
and thesis of the work and entices people to read the paper. In addition, the
Introduction provides the writer and reader a road map or snapshot of the whole
work. Academic writing in political science is very different from mystery or even
most fiction writing: readers don’t like surprise endings. Think for yourself how
difficult reading an article is when the author isn’t clear about her or his thesis (the
point of the piece), let alone vague in specifying the query that inspired the work,
14   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

or alternative answers, methodology, cases, and findings. In the Introduction,

you express these essentials clearly and effectively, with minimal jargon. In addi-
tion, writing the Introduction provides an opportunity for refining the paper’s
title. A good title will, in a few phrases, convey your question, argument, and
cases in a memorable and creative way.
Finally, you have a completed draft. Hooray! A first full draft is occasion to
celebrate—but not too much because you are at mile 22; you still need to finish
strong. Some students will turn to writing an abstract and preparing a presenta-
tion, although I recommend that all of you partake in these activities. Writing
a paragraph summary of this mammoth project will help you zero in on what is
truly important and will help you fine tune your title, as well as rethink elements
of the draft. Learning researchers also suggest that making presentations will have
a positive effect, as they tap into students’ multiple intelligences.14 Considering
how to present your work—what you will say and what you will show—as well
as hearing and answering questions from others are processes that give you new
ideas and energy so that you can move forward with the last tasks of perfecting
your paper.
With all of the sections and additional portions drafted, you can finally com-
plete this project. Even though you have been spiraling through the process,
refining and rethinking as you go along, you need to give that text a last, careful
read to make it as good as possible. Remember to consult chapter 6 again so that
you can use all the recommendations provided to turn in a polished and beauti-
fully written paper. After you turn in your draft, it’s time to celebrate. Not only
are you finished, but you have done a great job. Congratulations!
You now have an overview of the research paper and the steps you will take
to complete it. Admittedly, the tasks become real and clearer only when you are
working through them, but at least you can see that the basics are presented here
and the paper has clear boundaries. Whenever you find yourself getting nervous
or foggy about the process and the goals, you can (1) turn back to Table 1.1 and
(2) remind yourself:
To write this research paper, I have to accomplish eleven tasks (twelve with
the presentation), and I have to write six (five if your paper is not hypothesis
driven) distinct sections. Each of these sections has a definite purpose and a
set of items I can accomplish. After I finish each one, I can check it off as a
“completed section draft,” realizing that I will continue to think about and
improve on each part as I continue.15 Moreover, in the practical summa-
ries and recipes at the end of the chapters, I have precise recommendations
regarding what I have to do to finish each section. I also have additional
worksheets, calendars, and checklists available in the Digital Resources.
Thus, every part of the paper becomes manageable, particularly if I work on
this project over a period of time, as my professor recommends. By following
the directions and the advice spelled out here, I can turn in a paper that is
compelling to any reader and of which I will be proud. In effect, then, if I am
the tortoise and proceed slowly and steadily, I will win the race!
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   15

Notes
1. National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges,
The Neglected R: The Need for a Writing Revolution (New York: College
Entrance Examination Board, 2003), http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_
downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdf.

2. Marijke Breuning, Paul Parker, and John T. Ishiyama, “The Last Laugh:
Skill Building through a Liberal Arts Political Science Curriculum,”
PS: Political Science and Politics 34, no. 3 (2001): 657–61.

3. For an excellent discussion of the peculiarity of writing for each field, see
chapter 4, “Writing in Academic Communities,” in Thomas Deans, Writing
and Community Action: A Service-Learning Rhetoric with Readings (New York:
Longman, 2003). Deans advances the concept of a “discourse community,”
that is, “a group of people who are unified by similar patterns of language
use, shared assumptions, common knowledge, and parallel habits
of interpretation” (p. 136). Such a term certainly applies to academic
disciplines such as political science.

4. Ibid. Throughout this chapter, Deans develops the metaphor of writing in

a particular discipline as being a traveler, a visitor to “strange lands.” He
does so by including two interesting works: an essay by Nancy Sakamoto
and an article by Lucille McCarthy. Sakamoto examines the differences in
the ways Japanese and Americans conceive of and carry on conversations,
while McCarthy explicitly uses the phrase “Stranger in Strange Lands”
in the title of her paper examining how one particular college student
fared when trying to write across the curriculum during his freshman and
sophomore years.

5. To be successful in your research you absolutely must find high-quality

and reliable information that comes from reputable sources. Even such
facts, however, will not be enough because you must present them within
a narrative and an analysis that determines and defends which information
is essential for your purposes. Finding excellent sources and situating your
facts are part of the process of legitimizing your results. Your goal is to
produce research that withstands scrutiny of knowledgeable and skeptical
readers. Because numerous texts on the methodology and philosophy
of science explain that researchers interpret what they see or report,
knowingly or unknowingly, only what they deem important, scholars,
journalists, and other analysts know that they must take great care to
have their work taken seriously. On the ontological and epistemological
concerns, see, for example, Paul Rabinow and William M. Sullivan, eds.,
Interpretive Social Science: A Reader (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1979). Postmodernists will be disappointed in some places with
my discussion of the research process, because much of what I ask
16   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

students to do will seem consistent with “brute data approaches.” For

that terminology, see Charles Taylor’s piece in Rabinow and Sullivan,
Interpretive Social Science, titled “Interpretation and the Sciences of Man”
(pp. 25–71, especially pp. 53–54). I would argue, however, that students
need to think clearly about how intersubjective understandings come
about and this book asks them to study social reality systematically. I am
not advocating solely for a positivist approach (and denying the relevance
of interpretivism), but rather am conceiving of these methodologies on a
spectrum. Here, Audie Klotz and her colleagues, as well as Rudra Sil and
Peter Katzenstein, have had an influence on my thinking. Their works are
admittedly far more sophisticated, as their audience is primarily graduate
students and scholars. See Klotz and Cecelia Lynch, Strategies for Research
in Constructivist International Relations (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2007);
Klotz and Deepa Prakash, eds., Qualitative Methods in International Relations:
A Pluralist Guide (New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2008); and Sil and
Katzenstein, Beyond Paradigms: Analytical Eclecticism in the Study of World
Politics (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). My goal is teaching clear and
systematic thinking and writing to undergraduates, and I lack the space
to explain in detail the ontological and epistemological fine points, and
frankly, I am not sure that most of my audience would tolerate or be well
served by the discussion. I realize that my solution (and its simplicity) will
not please everyone, but I ask those of you who would like more attention to
constitutive processes to bear with me to see whether I am able to deliver a
guide that works for the kinds of studies you would like to see performed.

6. Of course, some artists have had great success with these extremes that
I am calling inadequate. Yes, I am a political scientist and not an art critic.

7. In working on the first edition of this book, I learned that Eviatar Zerubavel,
in his well-respected work, also uses Aesop’s famous fable to explain the
approach one should take to writing. See his The Clockwork Muse: A Practical
Guide to Writing Theses, Dissertations, and Books (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1999), 12.

8. In their first presentation, I advance these tasks in a simplified manner. I will

explain and develop the complexities in the ensuing chapters.

9. See Telequest, Across the Drafts: Students and Teachers Talk about Feedback
(Cambridge, MA: Expository Writing Program, Harvard University, 2005).

10. Some undergraduate papers in political theory may not include literature
reviews of secondary sources. Look to your instructor for guidance about
whether and how she or he wants you to handle the task of identifying
and classifying different perspectives. Other papers might not require a
literature review as described here but instead ask for an exploration of
 Chapter 1 ■ So You Have to Write a Research Paper   17

key concepts. Still, the conceptual portion of the paper (basing your ideas
on the work of scholars) is important and sets the tone for the quality and
nature of the research.

11. Some will take exception to the notion of causation in the social sciences
(especially univariate), and others would prefer to consider correlation.
Still another set of readers will want attention to noncausal research.
In the fourth edition, I am explicitly presenting a noncausal student
paper, as well as causal ones. In my personal experience with typical
undergraduate majors, students have such a fuzzy notion of the social and
political world that correlation and then causal thinking constitute a key
first step to increasing their analytical capabilities. As students become
more sophisticated methodologically, I encourage them to consider the
arguments against causation and for mutual constitution, but at this early
stage in their careers, I emphatically believe that thinking about causes can
be both useful and appropriate. Still, many students don’t write these kinds
of papers, and thus I have included a new student and an explanation of her
challenges in this edition.

12. The alternative is if the variables are noncontinuous or discrete (also

referred to as category variables, which can come in unranked versions
called nominal—such as sex or religion—or ranked versions called
ordinal—such as educational achievement of primary, secondary, some
college, college graduate, or postgraduate). With discrete variables, the
basic hypothesis would read something like the following: “If X is A, then
Y is B, but if X is C, then Y is D.” Please note that we will discuss types of
data—nominal, ordinal, and interval—in more detail in chapters 5 and 7.

13. W. Phillips Shively, The Craft of Political Research, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002), 17.

14. Howard Gardner, renowned developmental psychologist who is the John H.

and Elisabeth A. Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education at Harvard
University’s Graduate School of Education, explains to the lay reader
that humans have multiple intelligences (MI), not “one central, all-
purpose computer.” Keeping with what he admittedly notes is a simplistic
analogy, he writes that MI “assumes that we have a number of relatively
autonomous computers—one that computes linguistic information,
another spatial information, another musical information, another
information about other people, and so on. I estimate that human beings
have 7 to 10 distinct intelligences.” Because of MI, Gardner recommends
that instructors find different ways of teaching the same information
and giving students multiple opportunities to work through material.
Thus, the presentation takes advantage of more intelligences than the
18   Writing a Research Paper in Political Science

reading, research, and writing of the paper since in giving one, students
develop additional visuals, figure out how to discuss and explain their
work, hear others’ reactions and suggestions, and answer questions. Of
particular interest to those of us who do not follow this field, Gardner,
and many other psychologists, reject the idea of learning styles and
dislike how the notion of MI has been misused in popular culture and
in the education industry (opposing the idea that learners are “visual,”
“auditory,” or “kinesthetic,” for instance) to create resources that
pigeonhole learners into certain categories. He advocates, instead, for
pluralism of teaching strategies and the recognition of the uniqueness
of each student. See Valerie Strauss, “Howard Gardner: ‘Multiple
Intelligences’ Are not ‘Learning Styles,’” Washington Post, October 16,
2013. Accessed March 13, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/
answer-sheet/wp/2013/10/16/howard-gardner-multiple-intelligences-
are-not-learning-styles/?utm_term=.c923b7d479c0. I have also found
that socializing the research paper through the presentation raises the
stakes of poor performance for students. While some might not mind if
they privately earn a weak grade from a faculty member, students want
to avoid embarrassing themselves publicly with an inferior presentation.
Thus, an end-of-semester conference motivates students to sustain their
good effort, when they otherwise might be “running out of gas” and let up
because they are discouraged. Then, despite their frustration, they work
through the presentation and, in so doing, overcome their discouragement
because students ultimately achieve a better sense of the whole project
from sharing their work with others and devote additional energy to that
final draft.

15. If you are writing these as formal drafts for your instructor to review, you
will be receiving excellent feedback to help you write a great paper. Be
sure to address and respond to the questions and comments your reader
makes, and do not hesitate to consult your professor during the process.
In addition, whether you have a faculty reader or not, you can also benefit
from the feedback of a friend, classmate, or member of your institution’s
writing center. Find a reader, and realize that criticism is useful;
comments help you sharpen your ideas and improve your skills.