Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict

In recent years, the quantitative study of conflict has increasingly focused on small-scale and/or localized conflicts in the developing world. In this paper, we analyze and critically reflect upon a major methodological shortcoming of many studies in this field of research. We argue that by using g...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Leila Demarest, Arnim Langer, Bart Meuleman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: The Ohio State University Libraries 2019-01-01
Series:Ask
Subjects:
Online Access:https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/88751
id doaj-b0d9323e8eba4b4fb9aa0b3b29ef096e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b0d9323e8eba4b4fb9aa0b3b29ef096e2020-11-25T00:55:07ZengThe Ohio State University LibrariesAsk2544-07992019-01-01281214210.18061/ask.v28i1.0002Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflictLeila Demarest0Arnim Langer1Bart Meuleman2Leiden UniversityUniversity of LeuvenUniversity of LeuvenIn recent years, the quantitative study of conflict has increasingly focused on small-scale and/or localized conflicts in the developing world. In this paper, we analyze and critically reflect upon a major methodological shortcoming of many studies in this field of research. We argue that by using group- or macro-level empirical data and modelling techniques, while at the same time theoretically underpinning observed empirical associations with individual-level mechanisms, many of these studies risk committing an ecological fallacy. The individual-level mechanism on which many studies rely concerns the presence of grievances which mobilize people to participate in contentious politics. This motivational approach was also present in early studies on protest mobilization in Western societies, which often relied on similar research designs. However, subsequent advances in this literature and the use of methods that were targeted more directly at the individual level uncovered that grievances alone cannot explain mobilization and that organizational capabilities and complex psychological mechanisms of belonging also form part of the puzzle. While drawing on conflict events as well as survey data from Africa, we demonstrate empirically that here, as well, inferring micro-level relations and dynamics from macro-level empirical models can lead to erroneous interpretations and inferences. Hence, we argue that to improve our understanding of conflict mobilization in the developing world, especially for conflicts with low levels of violence, it is necessary to substantially expand our methodological toolbox beyond macro-level analyses.https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/88751ecological fallacymethodological individualismconflict studiessocial movementsprotests
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Leila Demarest
Arnim Langer
Bart Meuleman
spellingShingle Leila Demarest
Arnim Langer
Bart Meuleman
Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
Ask
ecological fallacy
methodological individualism
conflict studies
social movements
protests
author_facet Leila Demarest
Arnim Langer
Bart Meuleman
author_sort Leila Demarest
title Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
title_short Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
title_full Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
title_fullStr Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
title_full_unstemmed Between fallacy and feasibility? Dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
title_sort between fallacy and feasibility? dealing with the risk of ecological fallacies in the quantitative study of protest mobilization and conflict
publisher The Ohio State University Libraries
series Ask
issn 2544-0799
publishDate 2019-01-01
description In recent years, the quantitative study of conflict has increasingly focused on small-scale and/or localized conflicts in the developing world. In this paper, we analyze and critically reflect upon a major methodological shortcoming of many studies in this field of research. We argue that by using group- or macro-level empirical data and modelling techniques, while at the same time theoretically underpinning observed empirical associations with individual-level mechanisms, many of these studies risk committing an ecological fallacy. The individual-level mechanism on which many studies rely concerns the presence of grievances which mobilize people to participate in contentious politics. This motivational approach was also present in early studies on protest mobilization in Western societies, which often relied on similar research designs. However, subsequent advances in this literature and the use of methods that were targeted more directly at the individual level uncovered that grievances alone cannot explain mobilization and that organizational capabilities and complex psychological mechanisms of belonging also form part of the puzzle. While drawing on conflict events as well as survey data from Africa, we demonstrate empirically that here, as well, inferring micro-level relations and dynamics from macro-level empirical models can lead to erroneous interpretations and inferences. Hence, we argue that to improve our understanding of conflict mobilization in the developing world, especially for conflicts with low levels of violence, it is necessary to substantially expand our methodological toolbox beyond macro-level analyses.
topic ecological fallacy
methodological individualism
conflict studies
social movements
protests
url https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/88751
work_keys_str_mv AT leilademarest betweenfallacyandfeasibilitydealingwiththeriskofecologicalfallaciesinthequantitativestudyofprotestmobilizationandconflict
AT arnimlanger betweenfallacyandfeasibilitydealingwiththeriskofecologicalfallaciesinthequantitativestudyofprotestmobilizationandconflict
AT bartmeuleman betweenfallacyandfeasibilitydealingwiththeriskofecologicalfallaciesinthequantitativestudyofprotestmobilizationandconflict
_version_ 1725231984439984128