IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v628y2010i1p72-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Future of Field Experiments in International Relations

Author

Listed:
  • Susan D. Hyde

    (Yale University)

Abstract

Can international relations (IR) be studied productively with field experimental methods? The two most common existing empirical approaches in IR rely on cross-national data, detailed case studies, or a combination of the two. One as yet uncommon approach is the use of randomized field experiments to evaluate causal hypotheses. Applying such methods within IR complements other theoretical, case study, and observational research, and permits a productive research agenda to be built by testing the micro-foundations of theories within IR. This argument is illustrated by exploring how field experimental methods could be applied to two existing areas: how international institutions facilitate cooperation, and whether international actors can promote democracy in sovereign states.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan D. Hyde, 2010. "The Future of Field Experiments in International Relations," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 628(1), pages 72-84, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:628:y:2010:i:1:p:72-84
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716209351513
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716209351513
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716209351513?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin, Lisa L. & Simmons, Beth A., 1998. "Theories and Empirical Studies of International Institutions," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 729-757, October.
    2. Druckman, James N. & Green, Donald P. & Kuklinski, James H. & Lupia, Arthur, 2006. "The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(4), pages 627-635, November.
    3. Edward Miguel & Michael Kremer, 2004. "Worms: Identifying Impacts on Education and Health in the Presence of Treatment Externalities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 159-217, January.
    4. Barnett, Michael N. & Finnemore, Martha, 1999. "The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(4), pages 699-732, October.
    5. Peter Burnell, 2008. "From Evaluating Democracy Assistance to Appraising Democracy Promotion," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(2), pages 414-434, June.
    6. Tomz, Michael, 2007. "Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 821-840, October.
    7. Habyarimana, James & Humphreys, Macartan & Posner, Daniel N. & Weinstein, Jeremy M., 2007. "Why Does Ethnic Diversity Undermine Public Goods Provision?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 709-725, November.
    8. Benjamin A. Olken, 2007. "Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(2), pages 200-249.
    9. Peter Burnell, 2008. "From Evaluating Democracy Assistance to Appraising Democracy Promotion," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56, pages 414-434, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bratton, Michael, 2013. "Measuring Government Performance in Public Opinion Surveys in Africa: Towards Experiments?," WIDER Working Paper Series 023, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Michael Bratton, 2013. "Measuring Government Performance in Public Opinion Surveys in Africa: Towards Experiments?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2013-023, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    3. Adela Toscano-Valle & Antonio Sianes & Francisco Santos-Carrillo & Luis A. Fernández-Portillo, 2022. "Can the Rational Design of International Institutions Solve Cooperation Problems? Insights from a Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Margaret Triyana, 2016. "Do Health Care Providers Respond to Demand-Side Incentives? Evidence from Indonesia," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 255-288, November.
    5. Juergen Bitzer & Erkan Goeren, 2018. "Foreign Aid and Subnational Development: A Grid Cell Analysis," Working Papers V-407-18, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2018.
    6. Baylis, Kathy & Ham, Andres, 2015. "How important is spatial correlation in randomized controlled trials?," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205586, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Francesco Drago & Friederike Mengel & Christian Traxler, 2020. "Compliance Behavior in Networks: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 96-133, April.
    8. Gisselquist, Rachel & Niño-Zarazúa, Miguel, 2013. "What can experiments tell us about how to improve governance?," MPRA Paper 49300, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    10. Temple, Jonathan R.W., 2010. "Aid and Conditionality," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4415-4523, Elsevier.
    11. Michael Callen & James D. Long, 2015. "Institutional Corruption and Election Fraud: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Afghanistan," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 354-381, January.
    12. Gisselquist, Rachel & Niño-Zarazúa, Miguel, 2013. "What can experiments tell us about how to improve governance?," MPRA Paper 49300, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Duflo, Esther & Glennerster, Rachel & Kremer, Michael, 2008. "Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit," Handbook of Development Economics, in: T. Paul Schultz & John A. Strauss (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 61, pages 3895-3962, Elsevier.
    14. Jean-Michel Servet & Bruno Tinel, 2020. "The behavioral and neoliberal foundations of randomizations," Post-Print halshs-02562758, HAL.
    15. Mobarak, Ahmed & Gonzalez Lira, Andres, 2018. "Enforcing Regulation under Illicit Adaptation," CEPR Discussion Papers 13114, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Esther Duflo, 2009. "The Experimental Approach to Development Economics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 151-178, May.
    17. Bo, Shiyu & Wu, Yiping & Zhong, Lingna, 2020. "Flattening of government hierarchies and misuse of public funds: Evidence from audit programs in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 141-151.
    18. Xu, Gang & Wang, Xue & Wang, Ruiting & Yano, Go & Zou, Rong, 2021. "Anti-corruption, safety compliance and coal mine deaths: Evidence from China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 458-488.
    19. Karthik Muralidharan & Paul Niehaus, 2017. "Experimentation at Scale," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 103-124, Fall.
    20. Baird, Sarah & McIntosh, Craig & Özler, Berk, 2013. "The regressive demands of demand-driven development," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 27-41.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:628:y:2010:i:1:p:72-84. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.