Skip to main content

Political Science I am trying to formulate a hypothesis based on the recent economic sanctions against Russia. From this,...

We can look at your hypothesis development at two levels, namely (a) a conceptual discussion of the proper elements of a mathematically expressed hypothesis, and (b) a specific discussion of the dynamic you are attempting to model and analyze.


First off, it is assumed that the test of this hypothesis will involve obtaining actual data points and applying statistical tests to determine the ability of the independent variables to explain (correlate with) the dependent ones. Generally speaking, your model will need to incorporate all material independent variables in order for any correlations to have real explanatory meaning. If significant determinants of state behavior are left out, you risk having (1) a lack of correlation due to other underlying factors which you did not incorporate (i.e. your data points were “apples and oranges”) or (2) correlations shown in the model that do not have explanatory power, because they are either coincidental or correlated with other variables not included (“spurious correlation”).


I think your inclusion of the length of sanctions to be problematic. Sanctions tend to be imposed on the basis that they will be continued until they bring about the desired change in behavior. They typically are not predefined. In fact the length observed for a particular sanction tends to be a dependent variable, not an independent one.  Perhaps what would be more meaningful would be some measure of the perceived willingness of the imposer of the sanctions to persevere with them. This in turn could be defined as how much the sanctions cost the imposer of them. For example, forbidding your domestic companies from participating in certain markets, in order to harm the other actors in those markets (think the US approach to Cuba or Iran) clearly costs those corporations business and profits, which in turn creates political pressure in the imposing state to limit if or how long those sanctions are kept in place.


Finally, remember that it will be a challenge creating actual metrics for some of these variables (especially the degree of aggression), and the data for those metrics may be very difficult to obtain. This is not to dissuade you, as there can be a lot learned from qualitative discussion using a well-defined model as a framework. Just think about the practicality of rigorous statistical analysis before allocating your time down that path. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.