Behavioralism

Behavioralism is a paradigm that became predominant in American social sciences from the 1950s until well into the 1970s. Although its reign did not last beyond the 1980s, it has transformed the fields of (American) political science and international relations (IR) so profoundly that it remains to this day an essential, albeit implicit, component of their identity. The article starts with the context in which behavioralism emerged, then engages the “Behavioral Revolution” in American political science and presents its main epistemic, ontological, and axiological tenets. It then moves more specifically to Behavioralism in IR, and to the terms of its “second debate.” The article concludes with an assessment of Behavioralism’s legacy.

Who killed the International Studies Conference?

Review of International Studies ◽

10.1017/s0260210506007182 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 32 (4) ◽

pp. 603-622 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

DAVID LONG

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

International Relations ◽

Political Science ◽

International Studies ◽

The 1950S ◽

This article considers the rise and fall of the first institution of international academic cooperation on international relations, the International Studies Conference (ISC), which was established in 1928 and continued activities into the 1950s. Its formation preceded by decades the present ISA as well as the international organisation of political scientists. The demise of the ISC was a result of the failings of the ISC itself, the influence of UNESCO especially its Department of Social Sciences, and the challenge posed to the ISC by the formation of the International Political Science Association.

A Study on Korea’s Acceptance of American Political Science between the 1950s and the 1960s: With Much Focus on Behavioralism in Political Science

The Journal of Humanities ◽

10.31310/hum.073.11 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 73 ◽

pp. 361-402

Author(s):

Jeong-Wan Hong

Keyword(s):

Political Science ◽

The 1950S ◽

The 1960S ◽

Reviewing the Reviewers: Ideological Bias in the APSR Book Section

10.1017/s104909650001177x ◽

1974 ◽

Vol 7 (04) ◽

pp. 370-374

Author(s):

Michael Parenti

Keyword(s):

Cold War ◽

International Relations ◽

Political Science ◽

American Political Science Review ◽

Free World ◽

Review Section ◽

Ideological Bias ◽

I would like to give attention to that portion of theAmerican Political Science Reviewwhich is most read and least criticized, the book review section. My reading ofAPSRbook reviews in recent years leads me to the following observations:Most of the books selected for review adhere to the orthodox ideological values of today's political establishment. More importantly, these books almost invariably are reviewed by political scientists who share the same centrist ideological slant as the authors they are reviewing. In the reviews dealing with international relations, for instance, cold war terms like “totalitarianism”, “Castroism”, “subversion” and “Free World” are employed uncritically. Western capitalist nations are described as having “governments”, while socialist nations are said to have “regimes”, usually identified as being under the tutelage of one personage, hence: “Mao Tse-tung's regime”, and “Fidel Castro's Cuba”. The idea that popular sentiments and democratic in-puts might be part of the governance of countries like Cuba or China is not entertained.

Political Science as a Discipline: A Statement by the Committee on Standards of Instruction of the American Political Science Association

American Political Science Review ◽

10.2307/1952376 ◽

1962 ◽

Vol 56 (2) ◽

pp. 417-421 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Gabriel A. Almond ◽

Eric C. Bellquist ◽

Joseph M. Ray ◽

John P. Roche ◽

Irvin Stewart ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Social Psychology ◽

Political Science ◽

Human Experience ◽

Conceptual Schemes ◽

The Social ◽

Factual Data ◽

Political science is a basic discipline in the social sciences. Although it must necessarily maintain close scholarly association with the disciplines of history, economics, sociology, anthropology, geography, and social psychology, political science cannot be considered a part of any of these other social sciences. Political science has its own area of human experience to analyze, its own body of descriptive and factual data to gather, its own conceptual schemes to formulate and test for truth.

Area Studies and the Disciplines: A Rejoinder

Issue A Journal of Opinion ◽

10.1017/s0047160700502480 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 29-31

Author(s):

John W. Harbeson

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Political Science ◽

Comparative Politics ◽

Scientific Knowledge ◽

Important Work ◽

Area Studies ◽

The Social ◽

Robert Bates’ letter entitled “Area Studies and the Discipline” (American Political Science Association, Comparative Politics 1, Winter 1996, pp. 1-2) uses the occasion of the SSRC’s abolishing of area committees to announce that “within the academy, the consensus has formed that area studies has failed to generate scientific knowledge.” As someone who has done some of his most important work on African development issues, Bates deplores declining investment in area studies as a “loss to the social sciences, as well as to the academy,” at an inopportune moment, “just when our [political science] discipline is becoming equipped to handle area knowledge in a rigorous fashion.”

Teach a Student to Fish? International Relations Scholars in the Classroom

10.1017/s1049096516002468 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 50 (01) ◽

pp. 214-220

Author(s):

Nina Srinivasan Rathbun ◽

Brian C. Rathbun

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Higher Education ◽

International Relations ◽

Political Science ◽

Undergraduate Students ◽

Theoretical Work ◽

Practical Skills ◽

Relevant Research ◽

American Higher Education ◽

The Social

ABSTRACT American higher-education institutions are under increasing pressure to prepare their students with practical skills for the workplace, and the social sciences—including political science—are not immune. Political figures have suggested—sometimes seconded by academics themselves—that research distracts academics from imparting practical skills to undergraduate students. Using a survey of international relations (IR) scholars, this article shows that this is not the case. Those who spend more time on research actually devote more time to policy-relevant research in their courses than more abstract and theoretical work, and they incorporate more contemporary issues. Research seems to encourage academics to teach their students to fish.

Excellence and Its Recognition: The Dissertation Awards in Political Science

10.1017/s1049096500008672 ◽

1980 ◽

Vol 13 (03) ◽

pp. 286-291

Author(s):

William D. Richardson ◽

Albert Somit

Keyword(s):

International Relations ◽

Political Science ◽

Comparative Politics ◽

Doctoral Dissertation ◽

Leo Strauss ◽

American Government ◽

General Field ◽

Memorial Award ◽

How many things by season season'd are.To their right praise and true perfection!Merchant of Venice, i, 107In 1958 the American Political Science Association initiated the first of what were to be a number of awards for outstanding dissertations. In that year the Leonard D. White Memorial Award was established “… for the best doctoral dissertation within the general field of public administration.” This was followed, in turn, by the Edward S. Corwin Award (1973) “… for the best doctoral dissertation in the field of public law,” the Helen Dwight Reid Award (1965) “… for the best doctoral dissertation in the field of international relations,” and the E. E. Schattschneider Award (1971) “… for the best dissertation completed and accepted in the general field of American Government and Politics.” More recently, the Leo Strauss (1974), the William Anderson (1975), and the Gabriel A. Almond (1976) Awards have been established for the best dissertations in the fields of political philosophy, international relations and comparative politics, respectively.

Some Contributions of Sociology to Modern Political Theory

American Political Science Review ◽

10.2307/1947011 ◽

1921 ◽

Vol 15 (4) ◽

pp. 487-533 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Harry Elmer Barnes

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

New York ◽

Political Theory ◽

Political Science ◽

The Subject ◽

Published Paper ◽

The fact that a sociologist has been requested to appear upon the program of the American Political Science Association is in itself far more significant than any remarks which may be made upon the subject of the relation of sociology to political theory. It is an admission that some political scientists have at last come to consider sociology of sufficient significance to students of politics to be worthy a brief survey of its contributions to modern political theory.Many of the more liberal and progressive political scientists will doubtless ask themselves if this is not erecting a man of straw, and will inquire if there was ever a time when political scientists were not willing to consider the doctrines of sociology. One or two brief reminders will doubtless allay this suspicion. It was only about twenty years ago that a leading New York daily is reputed to have characterized a distinguished American sociologist as “the fake professor of a pretended science.” About a decade ago an ex-president of this association declared in a twice published paper that sociology was essentially worthless and unscientific and that all of its data had already been dealt with more adequately by the special social sciences.

Podmiotowość państwa we współczesnym świecie. Globalizacja a sterowność

Idea Studia nad strukturą i rozwojem pojęć filozoficznych ◽

10.15290/idea.2018.30.2.05 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 30 (2) ◽

pp. 73-81

Author(s):

Piotr Rutkowski ◽

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

International Relations ◽

Political Science ◽

State Power ◽

Theoretical Concept ◽

Modern World ◽

Power Politics ◽

The Social ◽

Network Power

Paper examines place and role of states in the modern world. Firstly the concept of globalization will be shortly analyzed. It is a notion that, especially in the social sciences, has a lot of meanings, because it has many aspects and levels. Author will try to localize the main issues that makes globalization a complex notion. Secondly, problem of paradigm crisis in political science will be presented. Classic meanings of politics and power has been outdated, because of new phenomenons that are consequences of globalization. That means that we should try to look for notions and methods that will help us to understand surrounding world and socio-political sphere, especially when it comes to state, power, politics and international relations. Then the concept of “the art of rule” invented by Jadwiga Staniszkis will be presented. Author will emphasize that this theoretical concept will be helpful in analyzing subjectivity of states in the age of globalization. Then author, basing on this concept, will try to examine the subjectivity of state in modern world. An attempt will be also made to show what is network power and its consequences, point out the subjects that will replace state that is losing its position and think about the future of the states.

Emerging Models of Collaboration in Political Science: Changes, Benefits, and Challenges

10.1017/s1049096510990811 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 43 (01) ◽

pp. 49-58 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Rose McDermott ◽

Peter K. Hatemi

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Political Science ◽

Collaborative Research ◽

Interdisciplinary Collaboration ◽

Research Teams ◽

The Face ◽

Science Association ◽

Large Research

In increasing numbers, political scientists are engaging in collaborative research. It is useful to consider the advantages of such efforts and to suggest strategies for finding optimal collaborators. In addition, there are issues and challenges that arise in the face of increased collaboration, particularly interdisciplinary collaboration across the life and social sciences. Inevitably, as the discipline has moved from a dominant solo-author model to a wider array of authorship possibilities, whether those teams encompass two-person partnerships, large research teams, or something in between, new administrative and cultural questions have already begun to surface as the discipline works to assimilate these changes. Consonant with previous efforts by the American Political Science Association (Biggs 2008; Chandra et al. 2006), we seek here to continue a broader disciplinary conversation surrounding the opportunities and challenges posed by more diverse patterns of teamwork. In so doing, we hope to help continue to encourage transparent, predictable, and openly collaborative intellectual partnerships wherein individuals receive the institutional credit and merit they deserve.