The application of

scientific methods,
standards and
sensibilities in the
study of social
phenomena.

Can these
WHAT IS problems be
overcome? How

SOCIAL reliable is the

knowledge thus
constructed?

SCIENCE? What are the

problems
inherent in this
epistemological
approach?
 Concise And Coherent Theories A Few Key Concepts or Factors

Explanation Prediction Universality Causal Mechanism

Mathematical Modelling Hypothesis Testing Evidence Data-Driven

Observation Experimentation Repeatable Results Reasoning

Social Scientists Want To Grow

Up To Be Like Scientists
A SOCIAL EXPERIMENT
Who Wants
Fifty Dollars?
What does the result of the
experiment mean?
Which hypothesis explains
the result? (Or which
hypothesis does the result
support?)
Did you notice that there
was no causal explanation
here?
Instructions
Grab a pen (or pencil) and a piece of paper.
Sit on alternative seats.
Everyone must participate.
You cannot communicate with anyone else from this
moment onwards.
Conditions For Winning
The person who bids the highest amount will win the fifty-
dollar note.
Everyone must pay the highest amount you have bid as
administrative fee.
More Instructions
Write down the amount that you would pay for this fifty-
dollar note.
Write down your name on the paper as well.
Fold the paper, so that your bid remains secret.
The Rate Of Violent and Property
Crimes Rose Dramatically In The U.S.
Between 1950 And 1970
THE RATE OF VIOLENT AND Why?
PROPERTY CRIMES IN THE U.S. It was hard to say. Many changes
Four times the were simultaneously rippling
50% higher
rate in 1950. through American society in the
than it had
been in 1950.
1960s a population explosion, a
growing anti-authoritarian
sentiment, the expansion of civil
rights, a wholesale shift in popular
culture. It wasnt easy to isolate the
factors driving crime.
1950

1960

1970
DOES PUTTING MORE PEOPLE IN PRISON LOWER
THE CRIME RATE?

No responsible government In recent decades, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
would allow researchers to test successfully filed a number of lawsuits against dozens of
this in an experiment in the states in the U.S. to protest overcrowding in prisons. These
real world. In trying to answer
states were ordered to let some prisoners free.
such questions, researchers
often rely on a natural
experiment, a set of conditions
in the real world that happens Violent
to mimic the experiment they crime
want to conduct but, for In the three Property
rises by
whatever reason, cannot. years after crime
10%
Experiments are central to ACLU has rises by
won a case Prison 5%
(natural) scientific inquiry, but population
there are times when it is not
possible to conduct an
fell by 15%
experiment in natural science. relative to
Can you think of examples of the rest of
such instances? What is the the country
impact on the reliability of
knowledge constructed?
 The ratio
of arrests The proportion
per crime of population
Accounted
fell in the The courts between 15 and
for 30% of
1960s. were less 24 rose by
the rise in
likely to send almost 40%
crime.
criminals to between 1960
prison. and 1980.
Accounted
Okay, But Does The for 10% of
the rise in
Reduction In Punishment crime.
Return of
Account For The Full Vietnam
veterans
Extent Of The U.S. Crime Massive
migration of
Spike in the 1960s And African
Americans from
1970s? the rural south
to the urban
All these factors combined still cannot account for the full
north
extent of the crime surge. So, whats the missing factor?
Is TV The Missing Factor?
The data do not support the claim that watcing violent TV programmes will lead to violent
behaviour.

But what about the claim that

children who grew up watching a lot Kids in Kids in
of TV, even the most innocuous cities that cities that
family-friendly shows, were more got TV
vs. got TV
likely to engage in crime when they early later
are older?
This is not easy to test. We cant simply
compare kids who watched a lot of TV
with those who didnt, because two Kids in Kids in a
groups of children are bound to dier the same city who
in a great many other ways. How do city who vs. grew up
you set up the experiment so that you grew up without
are testing for only the eects of with TV TV
watching TV?
For every extra year a child was exposed to TV in his first 15 years, we see a 4% increase in
the number of property-crime arrests later in life and a 2% increase in violent-crime
arrests. The total impact of TV on crime in the 1960s was an increase of 50% in property
crimes and 25% increase in violent crimes.
 Perhaps kids
who watched a Perhaps the
lot of TV never parents became
learned to derelict when they
Perhaps kids entertain found watching TV
Perhaps TV
who watched a themselves. more entertaining
made the have-
lot of TV never nots want the than taking care of
got properly things the haves their kids.
socialised. had.

Perhaps parents
relied on TV to
Why Did TV Have occupy the kids
instead of
This Eect? Was TV engaging them in
character-
Actually the Cause? development
activities.
The eect was the largest for those who had
extra TV exposure from birth to the age of KNOWING THAT TWO
four. Since children in this age-group are FACTORS ARE CORRELATED
unlikely to be watching violent shows, DOES NOT ALWAYS GIVE US A
content couldnt have been the reason. CAUSAL EXPLANATION.
 How Does One Factor Aect Another?
SCIENCE SOCIAL SCIENCE

Independent
Variable

SIZE

Dependent
Variable

Human beings respond to several

The better we can keep the other
factors constant in an experiment,
the more certain we are of the
result.
factors all at once in real-world
situations. An experiment that tests
how people will respond to variations in
just one factor may have very limited
use in knowledge construction.

HOW MUCH CAN WE REALLY LEARN FROM
CONTROLLED EXPERIMENTS
How can we know whether an act
is altruistic or self-serving?
Determining this in the real world is
extremely hard, because it is
dicult to understand the
intentions behind another persons
actions.
Furthermore, situations that
motivate seemingly altruistic acts
are typically anomalies (e.g. natural
disasters), which means our
responses in those situations are

In Search Of likely to be atypical anyway; so they

probably dont say much about our
baseline altruism.

Altruism
People give a lot of their money and time to
Could we construct knowledge
about altruism by peeling away all
of the real worlds complexities and
bringing the inquiry into the
humanitarian causes. Does this mean people in
laboratory?
general are altruistic?
 Alan is given $20. He can oer any
amount between $0 and $20 to Zachary.

On average, the Alans

oer more than $6. The Zacharys usually
reject oers below $3.

A Z
IN SEARCH OF ALTRUISM

Ultimatum So the Alans usually give substantially more

than is necessary to ward o rejection.
Altruism?
Probably not, since the Alans have
something to gain.
 Classic
Alan is given $20. He can oer Zachary
$2 or $10.

Oer $10

New
IN SEARCH OF ALTRUISM Alan is given $20. He can oer Zachary
anything between $0 and $20.

Dictator
Similar to the Ultimatum Game, except that
On average, the Alans
oer about $4.

only the person given the money gets to

make a decision. A Z
Variation 1: Customers and Dealers Variation 2: Customers Approach
Were Invited To Participate Unsuspecting Dealers
Customer names his price; Dealer then Customer names his price; Dealer then
oers a card thats supposed to match oers a card.
the oered price.
On average, the The Dealers consistently rip o the
On average, the Dealers oer cards of Customers, with the out-of-towners
Customers make commensurate value. cheating more often than the locals.
fairly high oers.

C D C D

IN SEARCH OF ALTRUISM

Lists Dictator
Lists observations at baseball card conventions
Variation 1: Classic Variation 2: Take $1
Alan can choose to give up to $5 to Zachary. Alan can still give up to $5, or can instead take up to
$1 from Zachary

71% GIVE
35% GIVE
29% KEEP
43% KEEP

How much money changes hands in each condition of the

experiment? Here are the mean oers by game variant:
22% TAKE
$1.33
$0.33

-$2.48
-$1
10% GIVE
-$3 -$2 -$1 $0 $1 $2
6% GIVE
18% TAKE
SOME

30% KEEP
66% KEEP 28% TAKE 42% TAKE
ALL
Variation 4: Earnings Variation 3: Take $5
Alan can give or take up to $5, but the players have Alan can still give up to $5, or can instead take up to
both worked beforehand to earn their money. $5 from Zachary.
What Does People modify their

The Stanford behaviour according

to the situation they
are in and the role they
play in that situation.
Experiment - Philip Zimbardo

Tell Us About
Social I dont believe
that result.
- Steven Levitt

Science?