Political Science Quiz 2: Policy Communication, Research & Analysis

This assignment presents the solutions to Quiz 2, addressing key concepts in political science and policy analysis. The first question analyzes a report from the Pew Research Center, discussing its usefulness for policymakers and providing recommendations. The second question replicates parts of a study on gender bias in student evaluations of teaching, including a t-test analysis. The third question examines a Difference-in-Difference (DID) analysis for program evaluation, and the fourth question interprets ANOVA results, offering policy recommendations based on the findings. The assignment demonstrates an understanding of research methods, data analysis, and the application of research to policy making.

Running head: Assignment
Quiz 2
Name
Course Number
Date
Faculty Name

Assignment 2
Assignment 2
Question 1: Communicating with policy makers: Insights from policy minded researchers
Policy makers need to understand the importance of research and how they can implement research
output into policy development. A report by Pew Research Center shows that the most viewed content
on YouTube are those intended for children. This report is useful to the YouTube company decision
makers and state department incharge of digital content. Based in the findings highlighted in this
report, these decision makers can make policies benefiting the society and protecting children from
accessing wrong content.
The report outlines the vast amount of content uploaded on YouTube. There is a possibility that some of
the content are not well reviewed. This poses a danger to the content consumers in our society. It is
more alarming to find that most of the view content target children. Regardless of YouTube not
recommended for children, it is still observed that children content is highly viewed. With the
advancement in technology and easy access of gadgets and internet, stringent policies should be put
into place to control the content access by children. Parents should be more informed on the contents
children are accessing and they should know that YouTube provide YouTube Kids to allow the parent
curate the contents (Pew Research Center: A Week in the Life of Popular YouTube Channels) .
Question 2: Randomized Experiments using Survey & Conducting a T-Test
1) Outcomes of the study
- The overall rating of the instructor
- The rating of the instructor’s teaching effectiveness
- Overall rating of the course
2) The treatment
- In the treatment condition, the solicitation and the evaluation instrument used language that
we expected to mitigate gender biases
3) How were individuals assigned to the treatment group and the control group
- The individuals were randomly assigned to the study groups, either standard approach or anti-
bias language.
4) T-test to check the difference between the treatment and control groups in terms of the overall
rating of the instructor

Assignment 3
Two-sample t test with equal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 128 4.132813 .0817885 .9253311 3.970968 4.294657
1 | 120 4.408333 .0642734 .7040797 4.281066 4.535601
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
Combined | 248 4.266129 .0530565 .8355354 4.161628 4.37063
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.2755208 .1049236 -.482184 -.0688577
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -2.6259
Ho: diff = 0 degrees of freedom = 246
Ha: diff < 0 Ha: diff != 0 Ha: diff > 0
Pr(T < t) = 0.0046 Pr(|T| > |t|) = 0.0092 Pr(T > t) = 0.9954
Because the T-score is -2.63 and the two-tailed p score is 0.009 (statistically significant) we reject the
null hypothesis that there is no difference between groups. In conclusion we state that there are
significant differences in the overall rating of the instructor between the treatment and control groups.
5) How as a university president I would utilize the findings of this study
As a university president or a board member, I would advocate for policy change affecting how the
students evaluate their instructors. My advice would aim at adopting the new model of using the
language approach in collecting information on the instructors’ performance. Within my jurisdiction as

Assignment 4
either the president or the board member, I would expound the importance of the policy change in the
academic excellence to all the stakeholders. The study has just been done most probably once, which
mean that the finding could be due to chance. However, based on the strength or evidence ladder,
results from randomized trials have low levels of bias.
Question 3: Difference-in-Difference (DID) for program evaluation
1) Dependent variable
- Rate of homelessness
2) Coding of time variable
- The years before implementation is coded in 0, and the years after the implementation is coded
in 1
3) How treated variable is coded
- The states which implemented the program are coded in 1, and the states which did not
implement the program are coded in 0.
4) Calculation of interaction between time and treated
- Stata command: gen did=time*treated
- Excel command: =(time*treated)
5) Regression analysis
. reg did
Source | SS df MS Number of obs = 70
-------------+---------------------------------- F(0, 69) = 0.00
Model | 0 0 . Prob > F = .
Residual | 13.3714286 69 .19378882 R-squared = 0.0000
-------------+---------------------------------- Adj R-squared = 0.0000
Total | 13.3714286 69 .19378882 Root MSE = .44021
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assignment 5
did | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
_cons | .2571429 .0526157 4.89 0.000 .1521774 .3621083
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The program has a positive (0.26), statistically significant correlation (p <0.00).
6) Are the results biased?
The results obtained from the analysis of the program data may be biased. Some the potential sources
of bias is that it is not performed in a controlled environment and the variation between individuals,
locations among other potential confounders might introduce bias. A suggestion to the policy makers
would be to design a better study which improve inclusivity to avoid chances of missing out information.
Variables such as age and the reason of being in the street among other variables should be collected for
analysis.
Question 4:
1) Interpreting ANOVA results

Assignment 6
The p value is less than 0.1 which means there is a statistically significant difference across groups at
90% confidence level. When considering Bonferroni adjustments, the only statistically significant result
(p < 0.5) is Group 2 (environmental), which has a mean higher than the control group by 0.004.
Our p value is < 0.05 meaning there is a significant difference across groups. When looking at Bonferroni
adjustments there are two significant findings. Group 1 (economical) has a higher mean than the control
group by 6.8 at a significance level of 0.1 and Group 2 (environmental) has a higher mean than the
control group by 8.2 at a significance level of 0.05.
2) Policy recommendations
Residents of the city are keen in understanding how the money gained after the implementation of
recycling will be spent. Having a policy that assures them that the money will be used for city’s
development triggers their decision to support the change. The study shows that study participants in
the environmental framing groups did show significant differences compared to the control group while
the other groups were not significantly different from the control. This difference is consistent for the
policy increment of the consumer goods and average payment per household. Therefore, I would advise
on implementing policies that will improve the living conditions of the residents to keep them

Assignment 7
contributing towards the recycling agenda. Based on the analysis and study outcome, we observe that
the residents are only interested in seeing how the money collected would enhance their livelihoods by
maintaining better and cleaner environments.