
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


What if most political science studies are too weak to find the effects they’re looking for? In this episode, we dig into a new paper by Vincent Arel-Bundock and colleagues that reveals a striking truth: quantitative political science is greatly underpowered. With thousands of tests analyzed, the authors show that many studies have only a one-in-ten chance of detecting real effects — and that even experts vastly overestimate the field’s strength.
Arel-Bundock is Professor of Political Science at the Université de Montréal. In his new paper, he concludes that methodologists greatly overestimate the statistical power of political science research.
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
By University of Chicago Podcast Network4.4
158158 ratings
What if most political science studies are too weak to find the effects they’re looking for? In this episode, we dig into a new paper by Vincent Arel-Bundock and colleagues that reveals a striking truth: quantitative political science is greatly underpowered. With thousands of tests analyzed, the authors show that many studies have only a one-in-ten chance of detecting real effects — and that even experts vastly overestimate the field’s strength.
Arel-Bundock is Professor of Political Science at the Université de Montréal. In his new paper, he concludes that methodologists greatly overestimate the statistical power of political science research.
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

31,971 Listeners

6,814 Listeners

9,183 Listeners

4,042 Listeners

2,151 Listeners

10,727 Listeners

1,111 Listeners

1,513 Listeners

543 Listeners

476 Listeners

7,234 Listeners

174 Listeners

15,890 Listeners

605 Listeners