Michael Bang Petersen

Som studerende og forsker i statskundskab stræber man efter at opnå en systematisk forståelse af samfundsmæssige og politiske forhold. Kernen i dette arbejde er en metodisk stringent tilgang og en stærk bevidsthed om metoder. I enhver undersøgelse er det afgørende både at vælge en metode, der er velegnet til forskningsspørgsmålet, og at reflektere over, hvilke indsigter og konklusioner den valgte metode kan føre til. Metoder i statskundskab har siden sin første udgivelse i 2010 været et centralt fundament for statskundskabsstuderende og andre studerende. Den fjerde udgave er en opdateret og grundigt revideret version, skrevet af førende eksperter og forskere. Bogen præsenterer og gennemgår de mest centrale metoder inden for statskundskab: Planlægning og motivation af undersøgelser Indsamling og analyse af kvantitative data Indsamling og analyse af kvalitative data Kombination af metoder og formidling De forskellige metoder præsenteres med henvisning til konkrete studier og eksempler, hvor de er blevet anvendt. Derudover diskuterer bogen, hvilke indsigter de forskellige metoder kan føre til, og hvordan man bedst formidler sine resultater. Om forfatterne Kasper Møller Hansen er professor ved Københavns Universitet, Institut for Statskundskab Lotte Bøgh Andersen er professor ved Aarhus Universitet, Institut for Statskundskab Mathilde Cecchini er lektor ved Syddansk Universitet, Institut for Statskundskab

In 2005, twelve cartoons mocking the prophet Mohammed appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, igniting a political firestorm over demands by some Muslims that the claims of their religious faith take precedence over freedom of expression. Given the explosive reaction from Middle Eastern governments, Muslim clerics, and some Danish politicians, the stage was set for a backlash against Muslims in Denmark. But no such backlash occurred. Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy shows how the majority of ordinary Danish citizens provided a solid wall of support for the rights of their country's growing Muslim minority, drawing a sharp distinction between Muslim immigrants and Islamic fundamentalists and supporting the civil rights of Muslim immigrants as fully as those of fellow Danes--for example, Christian fundamentalists. Building on randomized experiments conducted as part of large, nationally representative opinion surveys, Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy also demonstrates how the moral covenant underpinning the welfare state simultaneously promotes equal treatment for some Muslim immigrants and opens the door to discrimination against others. Revealing the strength of Denmark's commitment to democratic values, Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy underlines the challenges of inclusion but offers hope to those seeking to reconcile the secular values of liberal democracy and the religious faith of Muslim immigrants in Europe.

Man har et standpunkt, til ... ja, tak, den kender vi. Politikere skifter holdning, som vinden blæser. Men er vi selv meget bedre? Ikke ifølge Michael Bang Petersen, politisk psykolog ved Aarhus Universitet. For vores hjerne er ikke bygget til nutidens komplekse finansforhandlinger og paragraf 20-spørgsmål. Den tænker politik, som da vi levede i små grupper på den østafrikanske savanne for tusindvis af år siden. Så den skifter holdning på baggrund af sukker, muskler og hormoner frem for logiske argumenter. - Måske er der en god forklaring på vejrhanernes ustadige opførsel?

In 2005, twelve cartoons mocking the prophet Mohammed appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, igniting a political firestorm over demands by some Muslims that the claims of their religious faith take precedence over freedom of expression. Given the explosive reaction from Middle Eastern governments, Muslim clerics, and some Danish politicians, the stage was set for a backlash against Muslims in Denmark. But no such backlash occurred. Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy shows how the majority of ordinary Danish citizens provided a solid wall of support for the rights of their country's growing Muslim minority, drawing a sharp distinction between Muslim immigrants and Islamic fundamentalists and supporting the civil rights of Muslim immigrants as fully as those of fellow Danes--for example, Christian fundamentalists. Building on randomized experiments conducted as part of large, nationally representative opinion surveys, Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy also demonstrates how the moral covenant underpinning the welfare state simultaneously promotes equal treatment for some Muslim immigrants and opens the door to discrimination against others. Revealing the strength of Denmark's commitment to democratic values, Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy underlines the challenges of inclusion but offers hope to those seeking to reconcile the secular values of liberal democracy and the religious faith of Muslim immigrants in Europe.