Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:48:20.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Everyday Democracy Indicators? How the Study of Democracy Illuminates the Value (and Challenges) of Collaborative Methodologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2021

Thomas Edward Flores Open the ORCID record for Thomas Edward Flores [Opens in a new window]
Thomas Edward Flores*
Affiliation:
Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School for Peace and Conflict Resolution
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Quantitative and Qualitative Collaborative Methodologies
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 565 - 569
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Asiamah, Gildfred, Awal, Mohammed S., and MacLean, Lauren M.. 2021. “Collaboration for Designing, Conceptualizing, and (Possibly) Decolonizing Research in African Politics.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bizzarro, Fernando, John, Gerring, Carl Henrick, Knutsen, Allen, Hicken, Michael, Bernhard, Svend-Erik, Skaaning, Michael, Coppedge and Lindberg, Staffan I.. 2018. “Party Strength and Economic Growth.” World Politics 70 (2): 275–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppedge, Michael, et al. 2018. Varieties of Democracy Codebook . Sweden: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Diamond, Larry, and Plattner, Marc F. (eds.). 2008. How People View Democracy . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Dorussen, Han, Bakaki, Zorzeta, and Kolbe, Athena R.. 2021 “Challenges of Using Collaborative Methodologies in Surveying Political Trust in Haiti.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dresden, Jennifer Raymond, Flores, Thomas Edward, and Nooruddin, Irfan. 2019. Theories of Democratic Change, Phase III: Transitions from Conflict. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development. www.iie.org:443/en/Programs/USAID-Democracy-Fellows-and-Grants-Program/Grants/Grantees/Theories-of-Change (March 25, 2019).Google Scholar
Firchow, Pamina. 2018. Reclaiming Everyday Peace: Local Voices in Measurement and Evaluation after War. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis. 1995. “Democracy’s Future: The Primacy of Culture.” Journal of Democracy 6 (1): 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaillard, J. C., Cadag, Jake Rom, Gampell, Anthony, Hore, Katherine, Le De, Loic, and McSherry, Alice. 2016. “Participatory Numbers for Integrating Knowledge and Actions in Development.” Development in Practice 26 (8): 998–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gellman, Mneesha. 2021. “Collaborative Methodology with Indigenous Communities: A Framework for Addressing Power Inequalities.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyde, Susan D., and Marinov, Nikolay. 2012. “Which Elections Can Be Lost?” Political Analysis 20 (2): 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, Oliver. 2021. “Balancing Rigor and Relationships in Collaborative Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, Judith G. 2017. Scorecard Diplomacy: Grading States to Influence Their Reputation and Behavior. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knutsen, Carl Henrik. 2010. “Investigating the Lee Thesis: How Bad Is Democracy for Asian Economies?” European Political Science Review 2 (3): 451–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Ziblatt, Daniel. 2019. How Democracies Die. Reprint edition. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Levy, Naomi, and Firchow, Pamina. 2021. “Measuring Peace from the Bottom Up with the Pasto Indigenous Group in Nariño, Colombia.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lührmann, Anna, et al. 2020. Autocratization Surges—Resistance Grows. Democracy Report 2020. Gothenburg, Sweden: Varieties of Democracy Institute.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward D., and Snyder, Jack L.. 2007. “The Sequencing ‘Fallacy.’” Journal of Democracy 18 (3): 5–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Monty G., and Jaggers, Keith. 2002. “Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2002.” University of Maryland, College Park: Center for International Development and Conflict Management.Google Scholar
Nooruddin, Irfan. 2011. Coalition Politics and Economic Development: Credibility and the Strength of Weak Governments. First edition. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, and Grömping, Max. 2019. Electoral Integrity Worldwide. Cambridge, MA: Electoral Integrity Project. www.electoralintegrityproject.com/the-year-in-elections-2017.Google Scholar
Paris, Roland. 2004. At War’s End. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Frederic Charles. 2000. Democracy in Translation: Understanding Politics in an Unfamiliar Culture. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, Frederic Charles. 2014. “Thin Descriptions: The Limits of Survey Research on the Meaning of Democracy.” Polity 46 (3): 303–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Jack L. 2000. From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Thomson, Susan. 2021. “Reflexive Openness as Collaborative Methodology.” PS: Political Science & Politics. doi: 10.1017/S1049096521000159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 2014. Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Strategic Assessment Framework. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.Google Scholar