A lesson that articulates the nature of the social sciences through an examination of some famous examples.

1. What are the
problems
inherent in this
epistemological
approach?
WHAT IS
SOCIAL
SCIENCE?
The application of
scientific methods,
standards and
sensibilities in the
study of social
phenomena.
Can these
problems be
overcome? How
reliable is the
knowledge thus
constructed?

2. Concise And Coherent Theories A Few Key Concepts or Factors
Explanation Prediction Universality
Causal Mechanism
Hypothesis Testing
Observation Experimentation
Evidence Data-Driven
Mathematical Modelling
Repeatable Results Reasoning
Social Scientists Want To Grow
Up To Be Like Scientists

3. A SOCIAL EXPERIMENT
Who Wants
Fifty Dollars?
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.
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?

4. The Rate Of Violent and Property
Crimes Rose Dramatically In The U.S.
Between 1950 And 1970
Why?
It was hard to say. Many changes
were simultaneously rippling
through American society in the
1960s – a population explosion, a
growing anti-authoritarian
sentiment, the expansion of civil
rights, a wholesale shift in popular
culture. It wasn’t easy to isolate the
factors driving crime.
THE RATE OF VIOLENT AND
PROPERTY CRIMES IN THE U.S.
50% higher
than it had
been in 1950.
1950
1960
1970
Four times the
rate in 1950.

5. DOES PUTTING MORE PEOPLE IN PRISON LOWER
THE CRIME RATE?
No responsible government
would allow researchers to test
this in an experiment in the
real world. In trying to answer
such questions, researchers
often rely on a natural
experiment, a set of conditions
in the real world that happens
to mimic the experiment they
want to conduct but, for
whatever reason, cannot.
Experiments are central to
(natural) scientific inquiry, but
there are times when it is not
possible to conduct an
experiment in natural science.
Can you think of examples of
such instances? What is the
impact on the reliability of
knowledge constructed?
In recent decades, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
successfully filed a number of lawsuits against dozens of
states in the U.S. to protest overcrowding in prisons. These
states were ordered to let some prisoners free.
In the three
years after
ACLU has
won a case Prison
population
fell by 15%
relative to
the rest of
the country
Violent
crime
rises by
10%
Property
crime
rises by
5%

6. The ratio
of arrests
per crime
fell in the
1960s.
The courts
were less
likely to send
criminals to
prison.
Accounted
for 30% of
the rise in
crime.
The proportion
of population
between 15 and
24 rose by
almost 40%
between 1960
and 1980.
Accounted
for 10% of
the rise in
crime.
Okay, But Does The
Reduction In Punishment
Account For The Full
Extent Of The U.S. Crime
Spike in the 1960s And
1970s?
Return of
Vietnam
veterans Massive
migration of
African
Americans from
the rural south
to the urban
north
All these factors combined still cannot account for the full
extent of the crime surge. So, what’s the missing factor?

7. 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
of TV, even the most innocuous
family-friendly shows, were more
likely to engage in crime when they
are older?
This is not easy to test. We can’t simply
compare kids who watched a lot of TV
with those who didn’t, because two
groups of children are bound to differ
in a great many other ways. How do
you set up the experiment so that you
are testing for only the effects of
watching TV?
Kids in
cities that
got TV
early
Kids in
cities that
got TV
later
Kids in a
city who
grew up
without
TV
Kids in
the same
city who
grew up
with TV
vs.
vs.
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.

8. Perhaps kids
who watched a
lot of TV never
learned to
entertain
themselves.
Perhaps kids
who watched a
lot of TV never
got properly
socialised.
Perhaps TV
made the have-nots
want the
things the haves
had.
Perhaps the
parents became
derelict when they
found watching TV
more entertaining
than taking care of
their kids.
Perhaps parents
relied on TV to
occupy the kids
instead of
engaging them in
character-development
activities.
KNOWING THAT TWO
FACTORS ARE CORRELATED
DOES NOT ALWAYS GIVE US A
CAUSAL EXPLANATION.
Why Did TV Have
This Effect? Was TV
Actually the Cause?
The effect was the largest for those who had
extra TV exposure from birth to the age of
four. Since children in this age-group are
unlikely to be watching violent shows,
content couldn’t have been the reason.

9. How Does One Factor Affect Another?
SCIENCE SOCIAL SCIENCE
SIZE
Independent
Variable
Dependent
Variable
The better we can keep the other
factors constant in an experiment,
the more certain we are of the
result.
Human beings respond to several
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.

10. In Search Of
Altruism
People give a lot of their money and time to
humanitarian causes. Does this mean people in
general are altruistic?
How can we know whether an act
is altruistic or self-serving?
Determining this in the real world is
extremely hard, because it is
difficult to understand the
intentions behind another person’s
actions.
Furthermore, situations that
motivate seemingly altruistic acts
are typically anomalies (e.g. natural
disasters), which means our
responses in those situations are
likely to be atypical anyway; so they
probably don’t say much about our
baseline altruism.
Could we construct knowledge
about altruism by peeling away all
of the real world’s complexities and
bringing the inquiry into the
laboratory?
HOW MUCH CAN WE REALLY LEARN FROM
CONTROLLED EXPERIMENTS

11. Ultimatum
Alan is given $20. He can offer any
amount between $0 and $20 to Zachary.
A Z
The Zacharys usually
reject offers below $3.
On average, the Alans
offer more than $6.
So the Alans usually give substantially more
than is necessary to ward off rejection.
Altruism?
Probably not, since the Alans have
something to gain.
IN SEARCH OF ALTRUISM

12. IN SEARCH OF ALTRUISM
Dictator
Similar to the Ultimatum Game, except that
only the person given the money gets to
make a decision.
Classic
Alan is given $20. He can offer Zachary
$2 or $10.
New
Alan is given $20. He can offer Zachary
anything between $0 and $20.
On average, the Alans
offer about $4.
A Z
Offer $10

13. Variation 1: Customers and Dealers
Were Invited To Participate
Customer names his price; Dealer then
offers a card that’s supposed to match
the offered price.
On average, the
Dealers offer cards of
commensurate value.
C D
On average, the
Customers make
fairly high offers.
IN SEARCH OF ALTRUISM
Variation 2: Customers Approach
Unsuspecting Dealers
Customer names his price; Dealer then
offers a card.
List’s Dictator
List’s observations at baseball card conventions
The Dealers consistently rip off the
Customers, with the out-of-towners
cheating more often than the locals.
C D

14. Variation 1: Classic
Alan can choose to give up to $5 to Zachary.
Variation 2: Take $1
Alan can still give up to $5, or can instead take up to
$1 from Zachary
18% TAKE
SOME
How much money changes hands in each condition of the
experiment? Here are the mean offers by game variant:
$1.33
$0.33
Variation 3: Take $5
Alan can still give up to $5, or can instead take up to
$5 from Zachary.
29% KEEP
71% GIVE
6% GIVE
-$2.48
Variation 4: Earnings
Alan can give or take up to $5, but the players have
both worked beforehand to earn their money.
43% KEEP
35% GIVE
22% TAKE
66% KEEP
28% TAKE
30% KEEP
10% GIVE
42% TAKE
ALL
-$1
-$3 -$2 -$1 $0 $1 $2

15. What Does
The Stanford
Experiment
Tell Us About
Social
Science?
People modify their
behaviour according
to the situation they
are in and the role they
play in that situation.
- Philip Zimbardo
I don’t believe
that result.
- Steven Levitt