Armchair analysis is the building block on which public policy research is built. It is the most common form of policy research and can easily be used in later field research methods. When beginning my analysis, I was skeptical of how effective a policy research method could be if the researcher never had to leave their home, or "armchair" to do it. I was uncomfortable with the rigid chart structure of the results and the many forms of commentary required for each source in the analysis. My feelings changed, however, once I realized how important the analysis would be to my thesis which I will be researching this summer.
For my thesis, I am studying the economic effect of the 1994 Winter Olympics in Lillehammer Norway. I am predominantly interested in whether hosting the games stimulated economic growth long-term in the inland counties of Norway, an original goal of the Lillehammer Olympic Organizing Committee (LOOC). For my armchair analysis, I identified three main concepts: (1) the 1994 Lillehammer Winter Olympics, (2) economic effects of hosting Olympic Games, and (3) inland vs outland Norway. By searching key terms under these three concepts in GoogleScholar and ArticlesPlus, I was able to discover many interesting and useful academic sources pertaining to my topic. These sources provided a backbone to my understand of the '94 Games, the economic effects of hosting the Winter Olympics and the regional landscape in Norway.
After completing the armchair analysis, I had a better understanding of the policy landscape in my thesis topic. The analysis also helped me identify the sources and authors which would later be extremely useful to my research in the future. It provided me with a solid background that made some of the other complicated analyses clearer and easier to perform. Even after my final project is turned in, I plan on continuing to organize my thesis research in my armchair analysis.
Building a registry provides the researcher with human resources to contact for later methods including key informant interviews and Delphi surveys. Networking is one of the most important skills of business and creating a database of potential network connections for policy research is a great way to develop those contacts. My registry is built with contacts that have helped and will help in the writing and researching of my thesis.
For my thesis, I am studying the economic effect of the 1994 Winter Olympics in Lillehammer Norway. I am predominantly interested in whether hosting the games stimulated economic growth long-term in the inland counties of Norway, an original goal of the Lillehammer Olympic Organizing Committee (LOOC). Most of the contacts on my registry are academic professors or researchers. These individuals represent many countries and will help me in my future studies in Norway this summer.
My concentration in the Public Policy major is business and I recognize the importance of networking. However, I underestimated how easily I could build my registry. Most of the individuals were extremely helpful and referred me to other individuals that would also be interested in helping my research. The coolest part about my registry is that most of the individuals on it have written serious pieces of academic writing that were already included in my armchair analysis.
Key informant interviews are crucial to obtaining information from experts or advocates in a particular research area. For my key informant interview, I chose Professor Allen Sanderson, a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Economics at the University of Chicago. He is both my thesis adviser and an expert in Olympic economics. Going into the interview, I was nervous about getting permission to record the conversation or encountering a technological mishap with the recording app.
After the interview, I transcribed the entire conversation and was extremely pleased with both the quality of sound in the recording and the responses my probing questions received. I learned a lot about the economics of hosting a mega-sporting event like the Olympics and interesting facts about Chicago sports. Recording the interview made it very easy to revisit points that Professor Sanderson had made and quote them directly. Overall, my key informant interview was very eye-opening at how useful talking to experts in person can be for researching a particular policy.
The Delphi method is a multi-round process that combines opinions and insight from experts. For my Delphi survey, I wanted to reach a consensus from economic experts on the best measures of determining the economic effects of hosting the Olympic Games. I emailed my survey out to a variety of academic analysts, Olympic experts and professors. The participants represented an assortment of countries including Norway, Germany and the United States.
My survey question was: What are the best measures to use in judging the economic effects of hosting the Olympics?
This method was probably my least favorite of all the research methods. While I enjoyed receiving resources from some of my textbook authors and favorite economists, I felt that the broad and simple Delphi question sometimes made a negative impression on experts. Overall, the method did put me in contact with several experts that I am planning on meeting in person when I conduct research in Norway this summer.
Focus groups are led by a neutral moderator and collect qualitative data which is crucial to policy research. For this project and my thesis, I am studying the economic effect of the 1994 Winter Olympics in Lillehammer, Norway. I am predominantly interested in whether hosting the games stimulated economic growth long-term in the inland counties of Norway, an original goal of the Lillehammer Olympic Organizing Committee (LOOC). For my focus group, I wanted to achieve three goals:
1. To understand how the ’94 Winter Olympics increased international recognition of Lillehammer with generations born after the Games occurred
2. To determine how many University of Chicago students (typically born/very young at the time of the ’94 Olympics) have heard of Lillehammer, Norway and would be interested in visiting
3. To understand what American tourists would visit on a trip to Norway
Before I began my focus group, I was concerned that I would introduce bias into the discussion or not engage all participants. I was skeptical that the discussion would uncover something that I had not previously discovered.
After conducting the focus group, I found a new appreciation for the way that focus groups dimensionalize both perception and reception. The method provided me with increased recognition of how individuals remember the Olympics and think about Norway in general.
Mystery shopping is a great method for providing qualitative and quantitative feedback on establishments and bureaucratic organizations. Unfortunately, I was unable to discover a "mystery shop" assignment for my thesis research from here in the United States. However, I was still interested in learning the method firsthand so I devised a new objection for this particular method: "mystery shopping" the Smart Museum on the campus of the University of Chicago.
I visited the Smart Museum with my family who were visiting Chicago from Indianapolis. I instructed them to pose as regular visitors to understand what steps the museum must undertake to improve their service and visitor satisfaction. Overall, the mystery shopping was a very interesting exercise. My family’s experiences left me with many ideas to enhance the visitor’s experience at the Smart Museum of Art, including additional interactive exhibits and more family-friendly material.
To be honest, I really enjoyed "mystery shopping" because the whole process made me feel like a spy on an secret mission. From what they told me, my family also enjoyed the thrill of being undercover at a museum. The method produced useful visitor feedback for the museum as well.
e
Systematic social observation (SSO) is the quantitative analysis of social phenomena through observation of the phenomena in its natural setting. For my SSO assignment, I decided to take a break from my thesis research and observe another social phenomena: how often University of Chicago intramural players in the graduate men's soccer league yell at student referees.
I wanted to determine if there was a trend in nationality and graduate school in individuals that complain to University of Chicago intramural referees in graduate IM soccer. Most of the graduate school teams that complain were not from the US and take their games very seriously. Understanding what nationalities and graduate schools are more likely to complain will help referees prepare accordingly and be ready to deal with complaints.
Before beginning my observations, I worried that it would be difficult to quantify the many ways that graduate students complain during the 40 minute soccer match. To combat this, I developed a chart that kept track of complaints, nationality and graduate program while I recorded my observations.
I really enjoyed systematic social observation because it combined observations with quantitative modeling. The different models were interesting to build and useful for my analysis, especially after taking a quantitative Excel class last quarter. The most helpful aspect of the SSO method was the ability to combine qualitative observations with quantitative analysis in a single product.
Policy experiments statistically measure the difference between a treated condition and a control condition. For example, the introduction of a new policy is a "treatment" variable.
Unfortunately, I could not find a feasible policy experiment relating to my thesis. Instead, I teamed up with four other classmates on a different project. For our policy experiment, we were interested if the color of recycling bin affected how often Ex Libris customers recycle. We observed the recycling bins of the café on four separate days (Tuesday through Friday) during peak lunchtime hours (12-1 pm). For the last two days (Thursday and Friday) we introduced a new, brightly orange-colored recycling bin to replace the regular blue bin which was used as the control variable on Tuesday and Wednesday. Our observers took notes about which customers chose to recycle and which customers used the trashcan for recyclable items.
Before the policy experiment, I was worried about potential bias and the limited amount of observations that would recorded in four days. Additionally, I was concerned that other people in Ex Libris would think the observers were a bit creepy and their behavior would be affected by the presence of the observers.
Looking back at our policy experiment, I thoroughly enjoyed designing, creating and introducing a treatment variable with possible policy implications. I found that our observations about the change in recycling (or lack of) helped us think of new ways to change behavior in individuals who choose not to recycle. I also had a lot of fun painting and decorating the recycling bin.
Surveys are fantastic for collecting information and can be administered to obtain viewpoints on an issue or policy from a particular group of individuals.
A few days after reading about this research method, I was emailed a survey regarding a recent protein bar purchase. After taking the survey, I conducted a cognitive test to investigate how clear the survey questions were to other takers. Afterwards, I conducted a pretest to understand how the survey could be improved after my initial improvements were added.
Surveys are everywhere!! I went into this assignment underestimating how useful data collected from surveys can be to companies and policy makers. The online survey was very easy to administer and take; however, I was surprised by how long it took to create clear and concise questions. I learned how important questions can be framed to achieve particular outcomes. I plan on using surveys in my thesis research this summer to determine how residents of Lillehammer felt about hosting the '94 Olympics.
