
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.

32,086 Listeners

6,773 Listeners

9,186 Listeners

3,990 Listeners

2,152 Listeners

10,751 Listeners

1,113 Listeners

1,523 Listeners

543 Listeners

478 Listeners

7,187 Listeners

177 Listeners

16,096 Listeners

557 Listeners