Ciencia política experimental: causalidad en el análisis político empírico. Una breve introducción

Edwin Atilano-Robles

doi:10.22201/fesa.26832917e.2025.6.3.427

Authors

Edwin Atilano-Robles National Autonomous University of Mexico. Facultad de Estudios Superiores Acatlán (MX) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6178-680X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22201/fesa.26832917e.2025.6.3.427

Keywords:

Causal inference, experimental methods, internal and external validity, counterfactuals, political science

Abstract

The experimental method allows the identification of causal relationships in key political science topics through the logic of the counterfactual model of potential outcomes. Based on the distinction between experimental, observational, and quasi-experimental methods, the text describes three types of experimental design—laboratory, field, and survey—along with the concepts of internal and external validity. It also argues that experiments represent the gold standard for evaluating causal relationships, as the potential outcomes model offers a strong solution to the fundamental problem of causal inference. Empirical studies in areas such as elections, game theory, and public policy illustrate the potential of the experimental approach to generate valid inferences. Finally, the ethical aspects of the experimental method are addressed, highlighting their importance for empirical research in political science.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Edwin Atilano-Robles, National Autonomous University of Mexico. Facultad de Estudios Superiores Acatlán

Ph.D. in political science from the Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE), a Master's in Government and Public Affairs from the Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (Flacso) Mexico’s academic headquarters and a Bachelor in Political Science and Public Administration from the Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales (FCPyS) of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM). Since August 2021, he has worked as a full-time professor at the Facultad de Estudios Superiores Acatlán (FES Acatlán) of UNAM where he imparts a variety of courses in the area of methodology and quantitative methods. Similarly, from 2019 to 2021 he worked as a lecturer at the FCPyS and from 2017 to 2020 as a laboratory technician of quantitative methods and rational choice at the CIDE. Candidate to national researcher in Conacyt’s National System of Researchers and tutor in the Postgraduate Program in Political and Social Sciences at UNAM.

He specializes in social sciences methodology research, quantitative methods, as well as comparative political economy with a particular emphasis on the effect of political institutions on the economic outcome of authoritarian regimes. He is currently involved in different research projects related to the teaching of methodological subjects at a professional level and the analysis of Mexico’s authoritarian dynamics during the 20th century.

References

Bansak, Kirk, Jens Hainmueller, Daniel J. Hopkins and Teppei Yamamoto. 2021. “Conjoint Survey Experiments.” In Advances in Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman and Donald P. Green, 19–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777919.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777919.004

Berinsky, Adam J., Justin de Benedictis-Kessner, Megan E. Goldberg and Michele F. Margolis. 2020. “The Effect of Associative Racial Cues in Elections.” Political Communication 37, no. 4 (March): 512–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1723750 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1723750

Berlinski, Nicolas, Margaret Doyle, Andrew M. Guess, Gabrielle Levy, Benjamin Lyons, Jacob M. Montgomery, Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler. 2023. “The Effects of Unsubstantiated Claims of Voter Fraud on Confidence in Elections.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 10, no. 1 (June): 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2021.18 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2021.18

Bertrand, Marianne and Esther Duflo. 2017. “Field experiments on discrimination.” In Handbook of economic field experiments vol. 1, edited by Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee and Esther Duflo, 309–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hefe.2016.08.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hefe.2016.08.004

Butler, Daniel M. and Charles Crabtree. 2021. “Audit Studies in Political Science.” In Advances in Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman y Donald P. Green, 42–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777919.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777919.005

Coleman, Eric and Elinor Ostrom. 2011. “Experimental Contributions to Collective Action Theory.” In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman, Donald P. Green, James H. Kuklinski y Arthur Lupia, 339–352. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.024

Druckman, James N. 2022. Experimental Thinking: A Primer on Social Science Experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108991353 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108991353

Druckman, James N., Donald P. Green and James H. Kuklinski. 2011. Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452

Dunning, Thad. 2012. Natural Experiments in the Social Sciences: A Design-Based Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084444

Eckel, Catherine and Natalia Candelo Londono. 2021. “How to Tame Lab-in-the-Field Experiments.” In Advances in Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman and Donald P. Green, 79–102. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777919.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777919.007

Findley, Michael G., Kyosuke Kikuta and Michael Denly. 2021. "External Validity." Annual Review of Political Science 24: 365–93. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-102556 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-102556

Galarza, Carlos Alberto Ramos. 2021. “Diseños de investigación experimental.” CienciAmérica: Revista de divulgación científica de la Universidad Tecnológica Indoamérica 10, no. 1 (enero-junio): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.33210/ca.v10i1.356 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33210/ca.v10i1.356

Gneezy, Uri and Alex Imas. 2017. "Lab in the Field: Measuring Preferences in the Wild." In Handbook of Economic Field Experiments vol. 1, edited by Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee and Esther Duflo, 439–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hefe.2016.08.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hefe.2016.08.003

Gosnell, Harold F. 1926. “An Experiment in the Stimulation of Voting.” The American Political Science Review 20, no. 4 (November): 869–874. https://doi.org/10.2307/1945435 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1945435

Imai, Kosuke, Gary King and Carlos Velasco Rivera. 2020. “Do Nonpartisan Programmatic Policies Have Partisan Electoral Effects? Evidence from Two Large-Scale Experiments.” The Journal of Politics 82, no. 2 (April): 714–730. https://doi.org/10.1086/707059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/707059

Imbens, G. W., and D. B. Rubin. 2010. “Rubin Causal Model.” In Microeconometrics, edited by Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume. The New Palgrave Economics Collection. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230280816_28 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230280816_28

Kellstedt, Paul M. and Guy D. Whitten. 2018. The Fundamentals of Political Science Research. 3a ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108131704 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108131704

King, Gary, Emmanuela Gakidou, Nirmala Ravishankar, Ryan T. Moore, Jason Lakin, Manett Vargas, Martha María Téllez-Rojo, Juan Eugenio Hernández Ávila, Mauricio Hernández Ávila and Héctor Hernández Llamas. 2007. "A ‘Politically Robust’ Experimental Design for Public Policy Evaluation, with Application to the Mexican Universal Health Insurance Program." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 26, no. 3 (summer): 479–506. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20279 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20279

Lewis, David. 1973. “Causation.” The Journal of Philosophy 70, no. 17 (October): 556–567. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025310 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2025310

Miller, Gary. 2011. “Legislative Voting and Cycling.” In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman, Donald P. Green, James H. Kuklinski and Arthur Lupia, 353–368. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.025

Morgan, Stephen L. and Christopher Winship. 2014. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. 2a ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Analytical Methods for Social Research). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107587991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107587991

Morton, Rebecca B. and Kenneth C. Williams. 2011. “Electoral Systems and Strategic Voting (Laboratory Election Experiments).” In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman, Donald P. Green, James H. Kuklinski and Arthur Lupia, 369–383. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.026

Neyman, Jerzy. 2023. A selection of early statistical papers of J. Neyman. California: University of California Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.8501421

Ostrom, Elinor. 1998. “A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997.” American Political Science Review 92, no. 1 (March): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585925 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2585925

Phillips, Trisha. 2021. “Ethics of field experiments.” Annual Review of Political Science 24: 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-101956 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-101956

Popper, Karl. 2002. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Routledge Classics.

Rawlings, Laura B. and Gloria M. Rubio. 2005. “Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs.” The World Bank Research Observer 20, no. 1 (spring): 29–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lki001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lki001

Salazar-Elena, Rodrigo. 2021. “El modelo contrafáctico de la inferencia causal ¿Por qué la correlación no implica causalidad? (Breviarios digitales).” En Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OZpY_wHbBH96IFlSfRFbwA05-KBnIVZn/view.

Sampieri, Roberto Hernández y Christian Paulina Mendoza Torres. 2023. Metodología de la investigación: las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. Ciudad de México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana Editores.

Sniderman, Paul M. 2011. “The Logic and Design of the Survey Experiment: An Autobiography of a Methodological Innovation.” In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, edited by James N. Druckman, Donald P. Green, James H. Kuklinski, and Arthur Lupia, 102–114. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921452.008

Thaler, Richard H. and Cass R. Sunstein. 2008. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Heaven: Yale University Press.

Toshkov, Dimiter. 2016. Research Design in Political Science. Political Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-34284-3