Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACT
Written as a short personal reflection, this article explores the development of political science as an organized professional discipline in the United States. At its inception, political science in the United States was principally concerned with political thought and constitutionalism, and it was taught with the public-spirited purpose of educating for citizenship in a constitutional democracy. Twentieth-century methodological trends at one time threatened to remove political thought and constitutionalism from the curriculum of political science, but recent disciplinary trends suggest that American political thought does have a place in twenty-first-century political science.

This article reviews the use of experiments in political science. The beginning section offers an overview of experimental design & measures, as well as threats to internal & external validity, & discusses advantages & disadvantages to the use of experimentation. The number & placements of experiments in political science are reviewed. The bulk of the essay is devoted to an examination of what we have learned from experiments in the behavioral economics, political economy, & individual choice literatures. 107 References. Adapted from the source document.

ABSTRACTPolitical science researchers have flexibility in how to analyze data, how to report data, and whether to report on data. A review of examples of reporting flexibility from the race and sex discrimination literature illustrates how research design choices can influence estimates and inferences. This reporting flexibility—coupled with the political imbalance among political scientists—creates the potential for political bias in reported political science estimates. These biases can be reduced or eliminated through preregistration and preacceptance, with researchers committing to a research design before completing data collection. Removing the potential for reporting flexibility can raise the credibility of political science research.

Is war necessary? In Peace and War prominent anthropologists and other social scientists explore the cultural and social factors leading to war. They analyze the covert causes of war from a cross-cultural perspective: ideologies that dispose people to war; underlying patterns of social relationships that help institutionalize war; and the cultural systems of military establishments. Overt causes of war--environmental factors like the control of scarce resources, advantageous territories, and technologies, or promoting the welfare of people like oneself--are also considered. The authors examine anthropologists' role in policy formation--how their theories on the nature of culture and society help those who deal with global problems on a day-to-day basis. They argue that both covert and overt mechanisms are pushing the world closer to a devastating war and offer strategies to weaken the effects of these mechanisms. This anthropological and historical analysis of the causes of war is a valuable resource for those studying war and those trying to understand the place of social science in framing pacific options.