Suchergebnisse

Intellectual exchange is central to progress in any discipline,
including political science. The transfer of knowledge, ideas, and
techniques takes place in many forums (e.g., advisor-student
meetings, conferences, department lounges) and it is no simple task
to systematically identify or quantify this interchange. In general
though, the fruition of a successful or insightful idea is a
published journal article or book. The way in which the author(s) of
a published piece of work acknowledges previous or contemporary work
that contributed to its development is via references or citations.
Thus, while we cannot easily keep track of the
entire process of intellectual exchange that
leads to publication, citations inform us of other (usually
published) work that influenced and contributed to the articles and
books that make up the research output of the field. We thank two anonymous referees for helpful
comments on content and structure.

ABSTRACT
This article explores publication patterns across 10 prominent political science journals, documenting a significant gender gap in publication rates for men and women. We present three broad findings. First, we find no evidence that the low percentage of female authors simply mirrors an overall low share of women in the profession. Instead, we find continued underrepresentation of women in many of the discipline's top journals. Second, we find that women are not benefiting equally in a broad trend across the discipline toward coauthorship. Most published collaborative research in these journals emerges from all-male teams. Third, it appears that the methodological proclivities of the top journals do not fully reflect the kind of work that female scholars are more likely than men to publish in these journals. The underrepresentation of qualitative work in many journals is associated as well with an underrepresentation of female authors.

The article considers the development of electoral political science as a new direction of Ukrainian political science. It is noted that in connection with the democratization of post-Soviet political regimes, there is an objective need to conduct electoral research, which should explain the peculiarities of voter behavior and the prospects for the use of electoral technologies. The origins of electoral research in American political science (P. Lazarsfeld, B. Berelson, G. Goda, E. Katz) and their perspectives in the context of possible autonomy in Ukrainian political science are shown. The contribution of specific foreign and domestic scientists to the development of electoral political science is highlighted. It is concluded that in Ukraine electoral political science as a scientific discourse emerged in the last decade of the twentieth century almost "from scratch" and is now formed as an autonomous branch of domestic political science.

The following notes deal with three aspects of American political science in which the trends, we believe, will be of particular interest to members of the profession. The findings presented here have been taken from a much broader study of the discipline currently in process. Given the present spatial exigencies, we have made some arbitrary decisions in selecting the topics to be dealt with here. It may be desirable, therefore, to indicate the scope of the larger investigation and the relationship of this paper to the parent study.We had originally planned to base our analysis of trends in American political science primarily upon the biographical and professional data contained in the 1948, 1953 and 1961 editions of the Directory of the American Political Science Association. While the data in these volumes were both useful and suggestive, we soon realized that this information alone was not sufficient for our purposes. We became increasingly convinced that any meaningful discussion of the state of the discipline required a reliable knowledge of the attitudes and views of the profession on a number of current issues and problems. Lacking this type of information, the authors of recent studies of American political science have been forced to treat their personal beliefs as reasonably representative of the membership at large; to speculate, however shrewdly, as to divisions of opinions in the discipline; or simply to ignore the topic altogether.

IN THIS PAPER THE AUTHOR PRESENT A THEORY OF PARTY INFLUENCE, BASED ON BAYESIAN DECISION THEORY, AS A PROCESS IN WHCIH THE VOTING DECISIONS OF INDIVIDUAL LEGISLATORS ARE INFLUENCED BY INFORMATION CONCERNING THE VOTES OR INTENDED VOTES OF THEIR RANK-AND-FILE COLLEAGUES. PROCEDURES DERIVED FROM THE THEORY ARE THEN USED TO ESTIMATE THE MAGNITUDE OF PARTY INFLUENCE RELATIVE TO THE INFLUENCE OF THE PRESIDENT AND OF PARTY LEADERS, COMMITTEE CUE GIVERS, AND CONSTITUTES ON ROLL CALL VOTING IN THREE POLICY DOMAINS IN THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. THE RESULTS IMPLY THAT PARTY INFLUENCE HAS IMPORTANT SHORT-RUN AND LONG-RUN CONSEQUENCES FOR PUBLIC POLICY.