2. Once you know the answer an explanation seems natural to us. What does it
have to say about common sense versus scientific explanations.
CANYOU EXPLAINTHE FOLLOWING?
AT
The paradox of common sense is that even as it helps us make sense of the
world, it can actively undermine our ability to understand it. Why?
It [common sense] is common only to the extent that two people share
sufficiently similar social and cultural experiences. What’s the problem with
that?
This course is called:Application of theories. Why?
Lecture 1
3. What are the four steps of the Lave and March model? What is the meaning of
each?
DOYOU KNOW
AT
What are the three things that make a good explanation [a beautiful model]?
Can you give account of a correct, incorrect and surprising explanation of the drop
in crime in the US in the 1990’s?
Tutorial 1
4. What kind of questions would we ask when we seek to explain a social
phenomena? What kind of questions when we want to predict it?
DOYOU KNOW
AT
What are the elements that compose the Hempel & Oppenheim model?
What are the [four] conditions that make an explanation adequate?
Lecture 2
What do hidden assumptions mean? How are they problematic? Can you give an
example?
Why is it important that the concepts used belong to the same categories? Can
you give an example?
6. LAVE & MARCH MODEL:
Charles A. Lave James G. March
4 Steps
Observe Speculate Deduce Ask
Facts
Phenomenon
result of !
unknown process
Process
other results
Implications
are implications!
empirically correct?
Modify
AT
7. HEMPEL & OPPENHEIM MODEL:
Explanans General Law (L1)
Antecedent Condition (C1)
Explanandum Singular Statement (E)
AT
8. Explanans General Law (L1)
Antecedent Condition (C1)
Explanandum Singular Statement (E)
Phenomenon to
be explained
Observe
Sentences used
to explain E.
process (model)
Speculate
Other results
Deduce
1
2
3
HEMPEL & OPPENHEIM MODEL:
AT
9. Explanans General Law (L1)
Antecedent Condition (C1)
Explanandum Singular Statement (E)
This is not enough: Conditions of adequacy
1
2
3
Explanandum follows logically from the explanans
Explanans must contain general laws and conditions (any kind?)
Explanans must have empirical content
4 ???
HEMPEL & OPPENHEIM MODEL:
AT
11. 1) Take out a piece of paper and write on it your student number!
2) You will be grouped randomly with at least other three classmates!
3) Follow the instructions and hand in the paper to me.
INSTRUCTIONS
In this experiment you have 10 points
There are two options: a personal fund & a common fund!
Your decision is how much of your points you want to put in the common fund. !
The remaining points will be for your personal fund.
AT
12. Let’s call the participants in group group:A, B, C, D!
The points personal fund count as they are:“if you left 5 points you get 5 points”!
The points of the common fund are added !
(points A + Points B + points C + points D)!
Then multiplied by 2 (doubled)!
The total result is divided equally among the four participants, independently of
what they put in the common fund
POINTS
AT
13. Case 1: Put all
Each participant put the 10 points (40x2=80). You get 0 points from your
personal fund and 20 points from you common fund.!
Case 1: Put nothing
No participant put any points points (0x2=0). You get 10 points from your
personal fund and 0 points from you common fund.!
Case 1: Put differently
Participants put 2, 10, 5 and 0 points, respectively (17x2=34/4=8.5). Each get 8.5
from the common fund. From the personal fund A gets 8, B gets 0, C gets 5 and
D gets 10.
EXAMPLES
AT
14. Decision:
Please indicate how many points you want to invest in your common fund.The
remaining points will be kept in your personal fund.
EXPERIMENT
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
AT
15. EXPLANATION (PREDICTION)
Law-like Statement: The more utility an individual perceives to obtain from
choosing a particular action, the more likely the individual will choose this action.
Antecedent Condition: In the public good game an individual perceives to
obtain more utility by not putting points into the common fund
Singular Statement: In the public good game it is more likely that an individual
will not put points into the common fund
AT
17. In 1954, there had already been a national uprising in the GDR which was
put down by the Russian military. Eastern Germans later feared repression
and did not continue the protest. However, in the 1980’s many reforms
liberated the political system in the Soviet Union (“glasnost” and
“perestroika”). In addition, in his speech at the celebrations of the 40th
anniversary of GDR Gorbatschow said “Life punishes those who come
too late”. Many eastern Germans interpreted this as an indication that the
Russian army will not intervene in new protests and therefore started
protesting.
TASK
A typical adhoc-explanation of the revolution is:
AT
18. Explain using the tools we have covered in the first two weeks
TASK
1. Why is this an inadequate explanation?
Using the two main mechanisms used in the reading material to explain
the active participation of citizens in the protest, give an adequate
explanation of the protest by means of the Hempel & Oppenheim’s
model.
2. Give an adequate explanation of why people protested.
AT
20. Participation in Monday Demonstration
0
125,000
250,000
375,000
500,000
Sept25 Oct2 Oct9 Oct16 Oct23 Oct30 Nov6
Participants
DATE NUMBER
PARTICIPAN09-25-89 6,500
10-02-89 20,000
10-09-89 70,000
10-16-89 110,000
10-23-89 225,000
10-30-89 350,000
11-06-89 450,000
Source: Table 1 from Braun, Norman. 1995.
Individual Thresholds and Social
Diffusion. Rationality and Society 7:167-182.
AT
21. Why did people do this?
To explain the revolution, many (sub)questions need to be answered.
1 Why did officials eventually not order to shoot to the protestors?
2 Why did Honecker decide to resign?
Why didn’t the soviet army intervene? (it had happened before)3
Why did so many people participate in the protest in Leipzig?4
AT
22. Why did people do this?
To explain the revolution, many (sub)questions need to be answered.
1 Why did officials eventually not order to shoot to the protestors?
2 Why did Honecker decide to resign?
Why didn’t the soviet army intervene? (it had happened before)3
Why did so many people participate in the protest in Leipzig?4
AT
23. Dissident groups, personal networks and
spontaneous cooperation: The eastern
German revolution of 1989
Karl-Dieter Opp & Christiane Gern !
(Am. Sociol. Rev. 58, 659-680)
AT
24. On the roles of groups and personal networks in demonstrations in
the repressive setting of East Germany between May and October
1989.
Focus of the paper
Observe: a social phenomenon
AT
25. Assumptions:
Societies are like Western Democracies
Ample opportunities exist for forming groups
mobilizing new members
personal networks
cooperation with other groups
Critical communication about the government or political
system can be exchanged without fear of severe repression
1
2
Observe: a social phenomenon
AT
26. These conditions are not met in authoritarian societies
Mobilization is difficult under threat of strong repression
The emergence of protest is unlikely
BUT...
The nonviolent 1989 rebellion in the former German Democratic
Republic (GDR)
Although opposition forces were suppressed by state repression
Protests erupted!!!
3
Observe: a social phenomenon
AT
27. But: Coordination?
Demonstrations in Leipzig and other parts of GDR were not organized
(in contrast to most demonstrations in Western democracies)
Spontaneous emergence
what happened then?
AT
28. rational actor model - RCT
Four types of incentives: Public goods motivation
Moral incentives
Social incentives
Repression
Speculate: Use a theory of action
Complete explanation: not only macro
What we will call the micro-macro link
AT
29. Deduce: Incentives to participate
political discontent
Promotes political action in large groups if actors believe their
participation will make a difference
Dissatisfaction with the provision of public goods
Assumption: Political discontent & perceived political influence
of protest (PG motivation) had a positive effect on participation
AT
30. Moral incentives
Discontent with the political and economic situations was high
Moral obligation to protest may have been particularly salient
Prediction: Moral incentives had positive effect on participation
social incentives
Encouragement by important others to participate
Prediction: Social incentives were salient on participation
Deduce: Incentives to participate
AT
31. spontaneous cooperation
If demonstrators were not organized, how did individuals coordinated
their actions to produce the demonstrations?
(+) Strong desires to engage in action against the government
(-) Costs of protesting were high
Citizens faced a dilemma:
When and where will sufficient people gather?
coordination problem
Coordinating mechanism
AT
32. Repression has no significant effects
friendship networks are very important
Members of opposing groups were regarded as unrealistic
Protests were not a result of the mobilization of opposing groups
Friends more than work colleagues were of influence
In authoritarian regimes trust is mainly placed on friends
Criticism of the regime, only among friends
Workplace helps mobilization if colleagues are also friends
Result: No repression -Yes networks
AT
33. Cost of participating must be low
Joining a demonstration on Monday prayers had less cost that other
actions (i.e., joining an opposition group)
Strong Situational incentives to
participate
67% reported they joined when others first participated in a
demonstration
Facing severe repression
Higher in more individualized protest actions
Few Incentives needed
AT
34. High public good motivation (feeling that what we do will
have an effect) & having friends critical of the regime were
the main factors inducing participation in demonstrations
Thus
AT
35. Notice
micro-macro link
To explain social phenomena we need to address issues also at the
individual level (i.e., incentives, preferences, etc.)
Individual behavior
Using a theory of individual behavior (i.e., Rational Choice Theory) will
allow us to make predictions about their choices and the way they interact
networks
Individuals hardly ever stand in isolation.Their social networks are essential
for the transmission of information and the spread of behaviors.
AT
36. 2. GIVE AN ADEQUATE EXPLANATION OF WHY PEOPLE
PROTESTED
AT
37. REVOLUTION EAST GERMANY:
Explanans General Law (L1)
Antecedent Condition (C1)
Explanandum Singular Statement (E)
(1) High public good motivation (feeling that what we do will
have an effect) & (2) having friends critical of the regime were
the main factors inducing participation in demonstrations
AT
38. PEOPLE PARTICIPATED INTHE PROTEST
BECAUSE:
(1) High public good motivation (feeling
that what we do will have an effect)
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, people felt that participating in the
monday prayer meetings could change the oppressive regime,
and therefore many citizens joined the monday prayers
Can we derive an adequate explanation for this argument?
AT
39. PEOPLE PARTICIPATED INTHE PROTEST
BECAUSE:
(1) High public good motivation (feeling
that what we do will have an effect)
Explanandum
Antecedent
Condition
Law-like
Statement
?
?
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, many citizens joined the monday
prayer meetings
AT
40. LAW-LIKE STATEMENT
Rational Choice Theory
The greater the feeling that participating in a protest will change
the oppressive regime, the more citizens will join the protests
Changing an oppressive regime is a form of utility
Hidden Assumption:
Law-like Statement: The more utility an individual perceives to
obtain from choosing a particular action, the more likely the
individual will choose this action.
AT
41. LAW-LIKE STATEMENT
Rational Choice Theory
The greater the feeling that participating on the monday prayer
meetings will change the oppressive regime, the more citizens
will join the monday prayer meetings
The monday prayer meetings are a form of protest
Hidden Assumption:
Law-like Statement: The greater the feeling that participating
in a protest will change the oppressive regime, the more citizens
will join the protests
AT
42. PEOPLE PARTICIPATED INTHE PROTEST
BECAUSE:
(1) High public good motivation (feeling
that what we do will have an effect)
Explanandum
Antecedent
Condition
Law-like
Statement
?
The greater the feeling that participating on the monday prayer
meetings will change the oppressive regime, the more citizens
will join the monday prayer meetings
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, many citizens joined the monday
prayer meetings
AT
43. PEOPLE PARTICIPATED INTHE PROTEST
BECAUSE:
(1) High public good motivation (feeling
that what we do will have an effect)
Explanandum
Antecedent
Condition
Law-like
Statement
The greater the feeling that participating on the monday prayer
meetings will change the oppressive regime, the more citizens will
join the monday prayer meetings
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, many citizens joined the monday
prayer meetings
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, many citizens felt that participating on
the monday prayer meetings will change the oppressive regime
AT
44. PEOPLE PARTICIPATED INTHE PROTEST
BECAUSE:
The greater the feeling that participating on the monday prayer
meetings will change the oppressive regime, the more citizens will
join the monday prayer meetings
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, many citizens joined the monday
prayer meetings
In Eastern Germany, in 1989, many citizens felt that participating on
the monday prayer meetings will change the oppressive regime
1
2
3
Explanandum follows logically from the explanans
Explanans must contain general laws and conditions (any kind?)
Explanans must have empirical content
AT
45. NEXT WEEK: LOGIC
AT
The chapter on Logic by Gensler (in your reader) covers the main topics you
need to understand for the tutorial. !
!
Although it is not a graded assignment, you are suggested to solve the first five
exercises of every section. !
!
Solutions to the exercises will be posted in Nestor after the tutorial. In the
tutorial we will address more elaborated problems using logic, based on your
practice of the exercises.
![Once you know the answer an explanation seems natural to us. What does it
have to say about common sense versus scientific explanations.
CANYOU EXPLAINTHE FOLLOWING?
AT
The paradox of common sense is that even as it helps us make sense of the
world, it can actively undermine our ability to understand it. Why?
It [common sense] is common only to the extent that two people share
sufficiently similar social and cultural experiences. What’s the problem with
that?
This course is called:Application of theories. Why?
Lecture 1]()