Thesis update: Starting chapter 1

Today was an important day in my thesis journey: I actually started writing it.

I have to admit there was a bit of apprehension -- I've been worrying about various aspects almost every day for the past 18 months, as I conducted research, tried out software tools, gathered data, wrote a thesis proposal (which went through 22 iterations) and conferred with my research advisor and thesis director.

But writing the first page and a half was easy. I didn't have writer's block. I didn't agonize about the first paragraph. I just started writing, and after two hours, had what I think is a very good start to the thesis (see below). It will surely go through many revisions between now and the end of the year (by which time I should have a complete draft) but getting past this milestone in quick fashion sets the stage for confident writing for the other sections that will follow.

Why was the first page so easy? Part of the reason was planning. Thanks to all of the preparations, which included writing an outline for my TD, I know exactly what I need to present, and the order that I need to present it in. I have already completed 99% of my research, and have my notes, datasets, and various precis organized on my computer. I have a few writing tactics that help me maintain momentum across multiple writing sessions; they include leaving rough memos in pointy brackets for footnotes and other text that can be easily added later, as well as leaving a note to myself at the end of every session, reminding me what I should do when I resume writing.

I'm copying tonight's efforts below. It's short, but gives an idea of the focus of my research, and also shows my writing approach:

Chapter 1

Technology has transformed the study of modern Chinese history and government affairs. Rare is the academic who doesn’t use computers to write a paper or communicate with colleagues, or browse the Internet for scholarly articles and other references.

But while the field has embraced 21st century communications and publication technologies, scholarly methodologies are not much different than they were in the early 20th century. Our understanding of Chinese official views and policies is largely defined by qualitative research, based on statements of Chinese and foreign diplomats, military deployments, bureaucratic actions, events, treaties, official documents, accounts of witnesses, and individual news articles.

Qualitative research has been instrumental in understanding the inner workings of the Chinese government, but it has limitations: Nobody is capable of reading all of the journal articles, books, and news accounts relating to individual issues, so we selectively and often haphazardly incorporate sources into new research. Not only is it impossible to cite sources that we have never seen, but also it is very easy to subjectively dismiss those which do not agree with our hypotheses, or do not match our ideological or theoretical perspectives. Another limitation: The inability (in some cases) of researchers to effectively gauge the relative importance of various factors upon a specific issue. The reasons may relate to the issues noted above (such as a lack of sources), or conflicting accounts of an event.

It should therefore come as no surprise that academics are sometimes in disagreement about what makes China react to external stimuli, why senior cadres change an important policy, or how China views key foreign relationships.

Consider Vietnam. During the Deng Xiaoping era (roughly 1978 to 1993), China had a complex relationship with its southern neighbor that was very early on marred by war and a refugee crisis, but by the early 1990s resolved to a state of détente. On these points, the qualitative evidence is overwhelming and experts are largely in agreement. However, when Western academics have looked at Beijing’s underlying views of Vietnam during this period, there is disagreement as to whether China was more concerned about Hanoi’s close relationship with Moscow, or Vietnam’s regional ambitions.

This paper will attempt to resolve this question by employing a computer content analysis (CCA) of the English-language wire service operated by the state-run New China News Agency. News-based CCA methodologies have been used for decades to study media, social trends, and politics, but their use in the study of modern Chinese history and government is rare. This is partially explained by …

CCAs cannot be used to analyze everything, or answer certain types of historical questions. And, as everyone who follows politics knows, statistical data can be “twisted” in line with a party platform or ideological agenda. Likewise, the data from academic CCAs can be selectively referenced, or interpreted to fit a hypothetical or theoretical

But there are benefits to using a well-designed CCA based on news content. Rigorous sampling methods and analysis can minimize researcher bias at the data collection stage. They can be used to confirm other qualititative and quantitative data. They can suggest conclusions that go against the prevailing academic discourse, and force a reconsideration of existing hypthoses. And, as we shall see later in this paper, longitudinal studies based on CCAs often reveal trends that are not apparent via traditional qualitatitve research.

I won't be copying and pasting my entire thesis into Harvard Extended, but will try to give writing updates over the next few months.