Methodological Opportunism in the Study of Conflict

Any field of study as intimately involved with human life as the social sciences needs methodological diversity if it is to be intellectually reputable. In political science, specifically in the study of conflict, methodological diversity is not an advantage but a must. Data are notoriously hard to gather in conflict or post-conflict settings. Often, empirical questions do not find reliable answers until much time has passed after horrendous events in history. In contemporaneous analyses of war, we often look past key inferential problems because we have little data to test divergent hypotheses. Alternatively, we apply existing theories to ongoing wars, which at times lead to faulty conclusions. In this talk, I show instances of methodological diversity in my research that have helped explain complex empirical questions. These encompass qualitative and quantitative methods. I will show how, within quantitative methods, a diverse toolbox allows for methodological opportunism in contexts - such as war - where empirical questions change often and different kinds of data may become available arbitrarily.