Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
115 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
antecedent
|
the object that a pronoun refers to (Ex: The DOCTOR finished HER rounds)
|
|
coordinating conjunction
|
transition words that help combine two independent clauses (and, for, yet, so, but, nor)
|
|
pronoun
|
a word used in place of a repeated noun
|
|
apposiitives
|
words or phrases used to modify another word or phrase for more detail and information
|
|
comma splice
|
when you use a comma to seperate two independent clauses without a coordinating conjuction (which is bad)
|
|
preposition
|
a word placed before a noun or pronoun to form a phrase modifying another word in the sentence (Ex: the road TO hell is paved WITH good intentions)
|
|
lie and lay
|
lie means to recline or rest on a surface
lay means to put or place something |
|
ambiguous reference and how to fix it
|
occurs when the pronoun could refer to two possible antecedents (Ex: Tom told James that he had won the lottery. Fix: Tom told James, "you won the lotter.")
|
|
who and whom
|
who is the subject, does the action
whom is the object that is being acted upon |
|
three uses for a comma
|
1. using a coordinating conjuction
2. parenthetical expression 3. list or series |
|
semicolon
|
joining two independent clauses
|
|
parallel structures
|
repeated syntactical similarities that balance the sentence (Ex: I like to swim, jump, and reading = bad)
|
|
transitions
|
bridges between what has been read and what is about to be read that help the reader follow the sentences
|
|
modifiers
|
adverb or adjective that further describes anything
|
|
redundancy
|
repetition in the sentence or paragraph that is not needed
|
|
inflated phrases
|
too many words that can be described in simplicity
|
|
active verbs
|
occur in a sentence where the subject does the action, avoids "to be" verbs
|
|
jargon and pretentious language
|
cryptic language that complicates a sentence, making it difficult to understand
|
|
sexist language
|
using gender specific pronouns/nouns when it is not appropriate
|
|
cliches
|
overused phrases that lose their dazzle
|
|
facts
|
details that can change but are important for the moment (Ex: flight plans)
|
|
proximate truths
|
Answer what and how, but not why
|
|
eternal truths
|
never changing, the why, describes things as they really are and will be, only received by revelation, personal, crucial, and verifiable
|
|
how can scholarship be a form of worship?
|
learning and faith are mutually facilitating, brings you closer of God
|
|
what is the role of meekness in scholarship?
|
Understanding that some questions can only be answered by revelation and not reason alone
|
|
science
|
an attempt to identify and test empirical generalizations
|
|
generalizations
|
conclusions that can apply to classes of objects
|
|
empirical
|
true or not true based on sensory experience
|
|
objective point of view
|
describes unbiased testing, research not dependent on particual researchers biases
|
|
normative
|
reflects our judgements about what should be
|
|
how to reformulate normative to empirical question
|
1. change the frame of reference
2. to ask empirical questions about the assumptions of the normative judgement |
|
What does a research question consist of and why is each important?
|
clear, testable, theoretically significant, relevent to the world, original
|
|
logical fallacies
|
unreasonable argumentative tactics
|
|
hasty generalization
|
a conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence
|
|
stereotype
|
a hasty generalization about a group
|
|
fals anology
|
an anology that is superficially similar, but not in reality
|
|
non sequitar
|
no causal connection when the missing key point is something that people would disagree with
|
|
straw man fallacy
|
oversimplyfing or distorting opposing views so that they are easily overcome
|
|
deductive reasoning
|
start with a logical argument that leads to a theory/hypothesis and then you test it
|
|
thesis
|
states a claim that will be supported in the body
|
|
credibility in the intro
|
knowledgebale and fair minded, and builds common ground
|
|
reliability
|
if other people do the same study, they will get the same results
|
|
validity
|
the effectiveness of the measurements to represent the abstract concepts
|
|
hypothesis
|
a testable statement derived from the theory (theory is large an encompasing, hypothesis is small and testable)
|
|
scientific method for political scientists
|
1. identify variables
2. make a hypothesis 3. test a hypotheis 4. analysis/generalizations 5. significance of the study |
|
replication
|
reliability
|
|
what does a hypothesis consist of?
|
1. falsifiable
2. has specified/operationalized variables 3. shows the relationship and direction (direction - negative, positive) |
|
data
|
empirical observations of one or more variables for a number of cases collected accroding to the same operational definitions
|
|
population
|
the larger body from which the data sample is drawn
|
|
subjective
|
when researches biases affect data collection, analysis, or conclusions
|
|
what are concerns with gathering data from the internet?
|
unregulated, legally or practically, and as a result can be misleading or false
|
|
what two things must we keep in mind when using aggregate data?
|
1. ecological fallacy - don't draw conclusions from different units of analysis
2. standardization - divide it by the population so that it is standard |
|
what can we do to minimize the affects of subjective bias in content analysis?
|
1. have more than one person code
|
|
Minimize bias in content analysis?
|
multiple researchers coding the data and then compare results
|
|
research design
|
logical method by which you propose to test the hypothesis for data collection and analysis
|
|
correlational design
|
collecting data on dependent and indpendent variables and determining if there is a pattern of relationship
|
|
correlations
|
statistics that measure the strength of co-variation (how they change together, not causation
|
|
case study
|
history of a particual event recounted and analyzed in depth, doesn't prove co-variation
|
|
primary difference between quantitative and qualitative
|
quantitatve is good for broad generalizations while qualitative is good for in-depth case studies and causal logic
|
|
quantitative research
|
thirty or more cases for a study
|
|
qualitative research
|
in-depth research with 30 or less cases
|
|
is quantitative more scientific than qualitative?
|
no because both use empirical evidence as well as the scientific method
|
|
observable implication
|
the condition when a theory can result in different numerous and varied results that can verify or falsify our hypothesis
|
|
falsifiable
|
the ability of the theory to be proven wrong through obervable implication
|
|
parsimony
|
simplicity (acham's razor)
|
|
what should researchers do if there is very little information available about their topic of interest?
|
they should broaden their topic
|
|
dichotomous variable
|
when a variable can only take on two values (dummy variable)
|
|
statistic
|
a numerical measurement that summarizes some characteristic of a larger body of data
|
|
measures of central tendency
|
mean, median, mode - they describe a typical case in a set (values from the study)
|
|
mean
|
adding all values then dividing by the amount of variables (interval data)
|
|
median
|
middle value (ordinal or interval data)
|
|
mode
|
works with nominal (Ex: religions). it is the most common value
|
|
skewed
|
when outliers distort the central tendency
|
|
dispersion
|
how closely or widely cases are separated on a variable
|
|
range
|
difference between the highest and lowest values
|
|
standard deviation
|
a summation of the difference of each case from the mean
|
|
significance
|
probablity that the relationship between the variables was a coincidence
|
|
describe the strength, direction, and significance in statistics
|
1. strength - shows the amount that a change in one variable correlates with a change in another
2. direction - positive or negative 3. significance - probablity that the relationship between the variables was a coincidence |
|
what are the data sets for types of quantitative variable?
|
Nominal (pet type)
Ordinal (pet weight by category) Interval (number of pets) Ratio (number of kids v. number of pets) |
|
Main objective of plsc 200
|
to gain new knowledge
|
|
how does the class help aceive gaining new knowledge?
|
Gives us the tools necessary to research and gain new knowledge, also the scientific method
|
|
what does the "science as a process" entail?
|
observation, theory, test, analysis, conclusion
|
|
what are the three careers to generate new knowledge?
|
lawyers, public officials, business people
|
|
what is the possessive of "it"?
|
its
|
|
three uses of apostrophes
|
1. indicates possesive
2. indicates time or qunatity 3. indicates contraction |
|
passive voice
|
when the subject of a sentence lack strength because the subject recieves the action instead of committing the action (look for the word "by" and past tense of "to be")
|
|
how do you fix passive voice?
|
make the subject committ the action (Ex: the senate passed the bill = good, the senate was going to pass the bill = bad)
|
|
misplaced modifier
|
any part of speech that does not refer to the right word or any word in the sentence (ex: I almost ate the entire chicken)
|
|
Darwin and Einsten
|
Darwin - inductive (started with data, then made theory)
Einstein - deductive (started with theory, then got data) |
|
inductive advantage
|
observations more closely related to hypothesis (good fit)
|
|
inductive disadvantage
|
can be circular, often too specific
|
|
deductive advantage
|
coherent and efficient
|
|
deductive disadvantage
|
overly abstract and distant from the real world
|
|
normative
|
call for action, prescriptions, "should" and "ought"
|
|
positive
|
scientific, neutral, supposed to be objective
|
|
post-modern critique
|
never completley objective in research because of biases
|
|
what makes a good research question?
|
according to KKV, importance to the real world and connection to scholarly literature
|
|
indepedent variable
|
narrow causes of the phenomen, experimenters change this to change the dependent variable (microloan presence in a country)
|
|
dependent variable
|
narrow phenomenon to study, what we are trying to change (amount of foreign aid recieved)
|
|
characteristics of a theory
|
founded in prior scholarship, explains known facts, suggests multiple dependent and independent variables, general, falsifiable
|
|
two units of analysis
|
1. individual (case study)
2. collective (group, country, or international system) |
|
two groups of motivations
|
1. material (money and power)
2. ideational (values and ideas) |
|
difference between grand theory and mid-range theory
|
grand theory - tries to explain all human behavior (people make decisions based on history)
mid-range theory - narrower, not trying to broad generalizations |
|
ad hominem fallacy
|
poisening the well, personal attack instead of topic at hand
|
|
red herring
|
any diversion to distract from the main issue
|
|
two advantages of primary data
|
1. not second hand
2. only the needed data 3. original and importance 4. avoids biases |
|
two advantages of secondary data
|
1. opinion of experts
2. does not take time to collect data or create data set |
|
golden rule for secondary data
|
find what is absolute best for your theory and acknowledge errors
|
|
difference between conceptual and operational definition
|
conceptual - broad, dictionary
operational - measure, specific, defined in terms of the specific study |
|
qualitative, quantitative non-experimental, quantitative quasi-experimental
|
qualitative - less than 30 cases, specific, case study
quantitative non-experimental - not choosing who the experiment is done on, no control variable quantitative quasi-experimental - choose who is experience and have a control group |
|
two purposes of the General Problem Area
|
1. introduces the topic
2. grabs the reader 3. puts it into research context 4. map out the project |
|
two components of research question
|
1. important
2. connected |
|
causal logic
|
explain clearly why and how x causes y, explaining the steps and mechanisms in detail
|
|
external validity and internal validity
|
1. external validity - things can be applied generally, qualitative is poor, quantitative is good (collective)
2. internal validity - appplied specifically, good causal logi, qualitative = good, quantitative = bad (individual) |
|
two concerns with sampling
|
1. sample size
2. sample bias |