Mentor Post #3

Noah Higgins

03/29/2018

Mentor Post

 

I met with Professor Levan on Tuesday March 27th from 4:15 to 4:30. At our meeting we discussed my abstract and my analysis draft/outline. Regarding my abstract, he thought it was pretty solid overall but could use a few minor structural changes as well as a more major change that involved separating out and explaining more thoroughly several of the conclusions I discuss in the last sentence of my existing abstract.

Finally, we had a fairly extensive discussion about my analysis section. While I didn’t ask him to read through what I had written, I walked him through my outline of how I will be analyzing my variables. He recommended that I make sure to reiterate the rationale behind exploring each specific variable prior to presenting my evidence. The reason behind this is to make sure I tie my evidence and analysis back to the academic literature on the subject.

We also briefly discussed a recently released book on Viktor Orban which has been getting rave reviews. It is now on my reading list but only for after the semester is over.

Mentor Post #2

I met with Professor Levan on Tuesday February 20th between 4:00 and 4:30. In our meeting, we discussed the last gasp of my inclination to pursue a discourse analysis approach and my ultimate decision to continue forward with a small-n neopositivist approach. We then discussed an event on democratic decline in Hungary held at the National Endowment of Democracy that I recently attended on his suggestion. The speaker presenting his research at that event was primarily focused on explaining the support for Viktor Orban and his illiberalism as a function of economic factors rather than other factors such as geopolitics or social capital. Professor Levan and I discussed the relative merits of this approach.

Our discussion also touched on the specific next steps for my project. These next steps primarily revolve around methodology and sources as a methodological section draft is due in the near future and it is always important to be expanding and improving upon the sources one is reading. With regards to methodology, we discussed the relative merits of single-case process tracing and a more comparative approach. We also discussed my inclination to utilize process tracing with a single primary case with other cases being used to inform my thinking without rising to the level of coequal case. With regards to the latter, he recommended that I meet with a research librarian to help improve my sources.