Data Laboratories (Data Labs)—by which we mean a collaborative, group-based research program that can be conducted inside and/or outside of the classroom and is designed to generate observational datasets—have numerous advantages for undergraduate learning and scholarly research. Undergraduate researchers in Data Labs learn about the actual process of collecting and constructing research-quality data—a skillset that is relevant for both academic and workplace opportunities but otherwise under-covered in most undergraduate political science degrees. This article discusses our experiences in founding and running Data Labs, general guidelines for effective lab structure, positive impacts on undergraduate learning and research output, and challenges to consider.

This article considers from a Wuffeauldian serio-comical point of view some fundamental insights into governance and public policy.

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in mask mandates on college campuses across the United States, and the reasons for disagreement with them by students in conservative regions are unknown. This study sought to explain the affective, behavioral, and cognitive (ABC) components of college students’ attitudes toward wearing a mask in the classroom according to the ABC model of attitude formation. Participants (N = 40) responded to eight open-ended, anonymous written interview prompts, which were coded and themed according to the grounded theory of qualitative research. Results indicated that cognitions about masking in general were varied, even among students in a predominantly conservative region. Participant cognitions about wearing a mask in the classroom ranged from the desire to protect self and others to discomfort and annoyance. Participants frequently reported experiences of negative affect while wearing a mask in the classroom, with perceived isolation reported as the most frequent issue related to negative affect. Participants frequently reported less classroom participation because of the mandate to wear a mask in the classroom, but they also frequently reported that they complied despite the cognitive and affective problems due to their desire to obey, social responsibility, and values regarding the care of others.

Research-based learning adopts a “learning-by-doing” approach toward teaching research. This article documents the experience of publishing a coauthored article with undergraduate students that grew out of a research-based–learning course at Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany. In particular, I reflect on the opportunities and challenges of engaging undergraduate students in research. The article demonstrates that research-based–learning courses must maintain a balance between the research process and research output. Too much focus on output overlooks students’ need to gain substantive knowledge, and the exclusive emphasis on the research process might reduce their motivation. Generally, students appreciate the autonomy and horizontality of relationships in research-based learning. Furthermore, the article shows that the knowledge and skills gained by students through research-based–learning courses facilitate their engagement in follow-up research projects, thereby paving the way for publishing research.

The United States took an active role in promoting some countries for a United Nations Security Council seat as part of its struggle with the Soviet Union during the early Cold War. Did these US-backed countries act in the interests of their promoter when they voted in the Council? Were these efforts of the United States advantageous? By studying the voting behavior of the US-backed countries between 1946 and 1965, this article answers the question of whether promoting some states to international institutions is beneficial for the great powers.

This article examines how one political science department used data and student feedback to make pedagogical choices about course modalities and pedagogical approaches during the COVID-19 pandemic. This case demonstrates that gathering data from students through surveys and other means and then utilizing that data in decision making is a valuable practice. However, there are constraints on collecting quality data in a crisis. With a need to react quickly and to gather and analyze data in a timely fashion, data-informed and student-empathetic decision making is a more accurate characterization of the outcomes in this case and a more achievable goal for the future than data-driven and student-centered decision making in a crisis. This study concludes that data-informed and student-empathetic decision making may be preferable in circumstances in which the data are inconclusive or support multiple conclusions as well as when there are conflicting needs and preferences among both faculty members and students.

What influenced women to volunteer for service in the US military during World War II? Whereas previous literature focused on potential intrinsic and extrinsic individual-level motives, we consider the broader structural context that may have played a role in female volunteerism. We leverage original data containing information on all volunteers who served in the US Army during World War II, with detailed county-level economic, political, and demographic data, to explore patterns of female volunteerism in the military. Our findings suggest that racism and sexism played a role in female volunteerism in many parts of the country, which may have undermined the government’s goals of mobilizing the entire country in support of the war effort.

Mail-delivered get-out-the-vote (GOTV) field experiments have been found to increase voter turnout in some but not all contexts. We hypothesize that mail-delivered GOTV interventions are more successful in low-salience elections and test this in a systematic way for the first time. Relying on a systematic literature review and a meta-regression framework, we find that primary elections have a strong and significant positive impact on the success of mail-delivered GOTV interventions, whereas other commonly used measures of election salience, such as voter turnout, margin of victory, and a dummy for local elections, do not. These results highlight the possibility of fostering voter turnout using GOTV mail messages, especially in primary elections.

This study examines undergraduate research experiences at a minority-serving institution (MSI) in a political science laboratory. Students contributed to projects in a collaborative research lab at the University of California Riverside that involves undergraduate and graduate students in projects related to health and politics. Adopting a participatory approach to research, the study’s research participants also are coauthors who co-created the research protocols; collected the data; transcribed, coded, and analyzed the data; and wrote up the findings. Our analysis of 12 in-depth interviews with current and former undergraduate research assistants (RAs) found that their work in the lab challenged their perceptions of what research is and what it means to do research; shaped their path to pursue graduate studies; developed their social and professional skills; and offered an inclusive and humanizing experience with graduate students and faculty members. Challenges that the RAs mentioned included time management, bureaucratic accounting and payroll procedures, and feelings of self-doubt; the lab’s culture of inclusion and independence mitigated some of these challenges. Our findings align with the scholarly literature that suggests collaborative research opportunities can have beneficial outcomes, particularly for students from groups that are underrepresented in doctoral programs.

High-impact educational practices benefit undergraduate students in a variety of ways. These opportunities include student–faculty research, study-abroad and study-away programs, and internships, among others. This study focuses on one type of these high-impact practices: research. Research experiences foster student engagement and success, and they especially matter for marginalized and minoritized students, who all too often are underrepresented in these experiences. This article discusses creating, implementing, and experiencing equity-minded research opportunities for students from three perspectives: department head, faculty mentor, and undergraduate participants.

Committees from the American Political Science Association (APSA) on the status of graduate students in political science conducted digital surveys in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Distributed using listservs from APSA, the surveys asked about a range of realities facing graduate students including employment opportunities, industry or academic support, and overall well-being. Analysis of the data pre-, during-, and post-pandemic revealed high anxiety in 2018 as part of students’ experience looking for jobs. By 2020 and 2022, anxiety worsened, such that the well-being of graduate students in political science should be addressed. We recommend a change in the structure of graduate academic programs to include stronger institutional support and an emphasis on alternative paths for work that does not entail teaching at an academic institution.

There is a growing consensus around both the importance of researcher positionality for the conduct of research and the intersectional and variable salience of positionality and its effects. However, at the same time, static assumptions of “insider” and “outsider” status prevail. This article presents a productive and two-fold intervention in these discussions. First, we show that the insider/outsider distinction is fraught on logistical and conceptual grounds. Relying on our experiences in conducting interview research from rural villages to diplomatic offices, we show that these elements of status are fluid and dynamic. Second, we suggest an alternative to this dichotomy through the aspirational status of a “credible visitor.” We define this as a performative aspect of positionality founded on humility and reflexivity and enacted through showcasing competence and engaging in transparency. We describe how this approach to performing status may facilitate access as well as fruitful and ethical research interactions.

Political scientists rely on complex software to conduct research, and much of the software they use is written and distributed for free by other researchers. This article contends that creating and maintaining these public goods is costly for individual software developers but that it is not adequately incentivized by the academic community. We demonstrate that statistical software is used widely but rarely cited in political science, and we highlight a partial solution to this problem: software bibliographies. To facilitate their creation, we introduce softbib, an R package that scans analysis scripts, detects the software used in those scripts, and automatically creates bibliographies. We hope that recognizing the contribution of software developers to science will encourage more scholars to create public goods, which could yield important downstream benefits.

In October 2021, the US Census Bureau piloted a new set of questions to operationalize sex and gender identity. This move follows a larger trend across the social sciences to rethink how surveys ask about sex and gender. Although this step is normatively positive, it complicates well-established protocols for weighting survey data. This article explores the likely pitfalls for survey researchers that accompany a shift in how the US Census Bureau measures gender. A preliminary empirical investigation of survey weighting indicates that using more inclusive gender categories will not negatively affect weighting metrics. Whereas the creation of a new set of US or even global best practices in measuring gender may be helpful to survey researchers, at this stage, there remain important empirical and ethical questions that are not well understood.

Education advocates lament the “leaky pipeline” in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), whereby students—especially minorities and women—drop out of STEM at successive stages of the educational system. Defining empirical political science as a branch of STEM, this article proposes that undergraduate research in political science can help to patch this leaky pipeline and expand access to scientific skills and habits of mind. I elaborate on three rationales to support my claim: (1) political science is a relatively diverse field of STEM; (2) college primes students to think like (political) scientists; and (3) students often encounter political science research opportunities for the first time as undergraduates, presenting an opportunity for faculty to “catch” those who selected out of STEM after high school. I substantiate my arguments by drawing on enrollment data, archival documents, the theories of John Dewey, and testimonials from former undergraduate researchers. I also recommend ways for political science departments to provide a meaningful STEM education by enhancing research programs.