 |
Debating the Direction of Comparative Politics: An Analysis of Leading Journals
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
28
published in the leading journals. For better or worse, the “ascendancy of research teams” in the social sciences that Mills feared some 45 years ago, has simply not happened in comparative politics. Work in comparative politics is still done mostly “under one skull.”
43
What are the implications of this individualist mode of intellectual production? On one
hand, it may help sustain “craftsmanship” and thus prevent, as Mills (1959: 224) puts it, the dominance of “rigid set[s] of procedures.” It may also increase the possibility of innovation by reducing the need for intellectual compromises that can result from collaboration. On the other hand, individualism may rob us of important opportunities for “gains from trade” that can be achieved through the division of mental labor and the pooling of distinct skill sets. Moreover, the possibilities for multi-method research would seem to depend on collaboration, especially as the level of technical expertise required to deploy advanced quantitative methods or modeling tools increases.
Figure 3. Articles with Two or More Authors, 1989-2004
29.2
22.4
20
34.2
23.9
26.1
30
30
11.8
11.8
5.6
10
28.6
21.1
26.7
50
27
39
28.6
10
25
41.7
41.7
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
Year
%
o
f A
rtic
le
s
Average
Comparative Politics
Comparative Political Studies
World Politics
Linear (Average)
IV. 5. Money and Comparative Politics: Funding for Comparative Research
The debate about the scientific status of comparative politics partly concerns money.
Hence, some argue that the ability of comparative politics and political science, in general, to compete successfully in the quest for funding from government agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) depends on the ability to project a coherent image of being “scientific.” In a provocative essay calling for a reorganization of the entire discipline, Laitin (2004: 37) writes, “Political scientists do themselves a disservice when they represent their discipline as a ‘blob’ or a ‘big umbrella.” Funders take us less seriously… We are consigned to
43
The phrase is Albert Hirschman’s, as quoted in Stepan (2001: 1).
|
| |
| |
|
|
28
published in the leading journals. For better or worse, the “ascendancy of research teams” in the
social sciences that Mills feared some 45 years ago, has simply not happened in comparative
politics. Work in comparative politics is still done mostly “under one skull.”
43
What are the implications of this individualist mode of intellectual production? On one
hand, it may help sustain “craftsmanship” and thus prevent, as Mills (1959: 224) puts it, the
dominance of “rigid set[s] of procedures.” It may also increase the possibility of innovation by
reducing the need for intellectual compromises that can result from collaboration. On the other
hand, individualism may rob us of important opportunities for “gains from trade” that can be
achieved through the division of mental labor and the pooling of distinct skill sets. Moreover, the
possibilities for multi-method research would seem to depend on collaboration, especially as the
level of technical expertise required to deploy advanced quantitative methods or modeling tools
increases.
Figure 3. Articles with Two or More Authors, 1989-2004
29.2
22.4
20
34.2
23.9
26.1
30
30
11.8
11.8
5.6
10
28.6
21.1
26.7
50
27
39
28.6
10
25
41.7
41.7
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
Year
%
o
f
A
r
t
i
c
l
e
s
Average
Comparative Politics
Comparative Political Studies
World Politics
Linear (Average)
IV. 5. Money and Comparative Politics: Funding for Comparative Research
The debate about the scientific status of comparative politics partly concerns money.
Hence, some argue that the ability of comparative politics and political science, in general, to
compete successfully in the quest for funding from government agencies like the National
Science Foundation (NSF) depends on the ability to project a coherent image of being
“scientific.” In a provocative essay calling for a reorganization of the entire discipline, Laitin
(2004: 37) writes, “Political scientists do themselves a disservice when they represent their
discipline as a ‘blob’ or a ‘big umbrella.” Funders take us less seriously… We are consigned to
43
The phrase is Albert Hirschman’s, as quoted in Stepan (2001: 1).
|
|
 Convention | | All Academic Convention can solve the abstract management needs for any association's annual meeting. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
