Suchergebnisse

In the last two decades, Ronald Inglehart has developed, tested, & attempted to falsify a series of hypotheses explaining some of the most important political changes occurring around the globe, & has also sought to resolve some of the most intractable challenges to the development of a paradigmatic comparative politics. This article examines the writings of Ronald Inglehart & demonstrates how his writings have enriched many important theoretical & empirical debates in comparative politics. At the same time it critically examines these writings to reveal some of the larger difficulties in creating a predictive political culture theory. 1 Figure, 28 References. Adapted from the source document.

Now with substantial extra coverage of methodological issues and an additional chapter on the philosophy of politics, this widely-used text introduces students to the approaches and methods of political science

Research Highlights and Abstract The study of gender, sexuality—and, in particular, queer theory—is central to the social sciences and humanities. Our analysis of citation practices shows that queer theorist Judith Butler is one of the most cited social theorists of all time. Yet political science remains distinctly untroubled by queer theory, and gender and sexuality are frequently treated as marginal (not central) concerns. We argue that queer theory has much to offer political science, not only by highlighting the importance of sexuality and the body but also in analysing 'power' and in politicising 'the political' itself. We suggest that the 'queering' of political science is long overdue, not least through politicising processes of knowledge-production in the discipline. There is something queer (by which we mean strange) going on in the scholarly practice of political science. Why are political science scholars continuing to disregard issues of gender and sexuality—and in particular queer theory—in their lecture theatres, seminar rooms, textbooks, and journal articles? Such everyday issues around common human experience are considered by other social scientists to be central to the practice and theory of social relations. In this article we discuss how these commonplace issues are being written out of (or, more accurately, have never been written in to) contemporary political science. First, we present and discuss our findings on citation practice in order to evidence the queerness of what does and does not get cited in political science scholarship. We then go on to critique this practice before suggesting a broader agenda for the analysis of the political based on a queer theoretical approach.

In the article, the conceptual basis of the discussion of political solutions in contemporary political science is revealed. The stages of evolution of political decisionizm and its reflection on political theory is defined. The stages of political decision-making process in conditions of sustainable democracy and transition countries are represented. The paradigmatic dimension of the study of political decisions as a scientific problem is revealed. Attention is paid to the positions of the effectiveness and efficiency of policy decisions in a multidisciplinary scientific perspective. It is noted that the contradictions between the demands of the effectiveness and rationality of the political decisions projects are visible. It is proved that the decision-making centers are oriented to the logic of administrative control and forced to change priorities in accordance with the changes of the political situation and balance of the interaction between the political forces. It is emphasized that decision-making process formalizes available alternatives and predicts the con-sequences of actions. In general, there is a trend towards the standardization of the political decision-making process.Key words: political solution, political procedure, political efficacy, political rationality, political result, political discourse. ; У статті розглядаються концептуальні засади обговорення політичних рішень у сучасній політичній науці, визначаються етапи еволюції політичного децизіонізму та його відображення в політичній теорії. Роз-глядаються етапи ухвалення політичних рішень в умовах сталої демократії й транзитивних країн. Вивчаються парадигмальні виміри політичних рішень як наукової проблеми. Звертається увага на позиції щодо ефектив-ності та раціональності політичних рішень у міждисциплінарній науковій перспективі. Зазначається, що про-тиріччя між вимогами ефективності й раціональності проектних політичних рішень проявляються у сфері взаємодії державно-владного управління та політичних чинників. Доводиться, що центри прийняття рішень, налаштовані на директивно-адміністративну логіку управління, змушені змінювати пріоритети відповідно до зміни політичної кон'юнктури й зміни балансу взаємодії між політичними силами. Підкреслюється, що діяль-ність щодо ухвалення рішень є процесом, який формалізує наявні альтернативи й прогнозує наслідки певних дій. У цілому існує тенденція до стандартизації процесу управлінських рішень. Визначається, що стандарт-ність ухвалення рішень у ситуаціях невизначеності доповнюється впливом зовнішніх чинників. Ключові слова: політичне рішення, політична процедура, політична ефективність, політична раціо-нальність, політичний результат, політичний дискурс.

This paper was accepted for publication in the journal Decision Analysis and the definitive published version is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2018.0374 ; Decision analysis has been with us for at least half a century. Over that time it has developed from a theoretical paradigm for individual rational choice to a practical tool for individuals, small groups and 'unitary' organisations, which helps them towards a sound decision-making mindful of the behavioural characteristics of individuals and group dynamics. Decision analysis has also shown its worth in the context of stakeholder engagement and public participation. The time is right for it to be more widely used in making societal decisions. However, to achieve that we need to realise that in many circumstances it will only be one input to the political process that leads to the actual decision. Recognising that suggests that our community of decision analysts needs to deconstruct our paradigm and attend more to communicating the result of the analysis in comparison with other inputs to the societal decision.

Includes index. ; Bibliography: p. 408-409. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Professional governing bodies of nursing have claimed that registered nurses have a responsibility to fulfill social mandate of political advocacy. Little is known about how nurses can accomplish this task. An exploratory, descriptive study (N=201) was undertaken to examine registered nurse's beliefs and practices regarding the concepts of politics and advocacy and secondly, to explore if nurses believe political activism to be a function of their advocacy role. Results suggest that nurses believe it is important to be politically active and report an interest in learning more about politics. The majority of nurses agreed that politics is the concern of nurses and agreed with the statement, "it is a duty of the nurse to be politically active" Despite these findings, nurses were only moderately active and just 30% of respondents stated that they were motivated to become more involved. Implications for nursing include personal and professional commitments, educational preparation in political science, democracy, policy analysis, and civic engagement, increased membership in professional organizations and workplace professional development in the political domain.

AbstractA common complaint from political scientists involved in the study of religion is that religious issues have been largely overlooked by political science. Through a content analysis of leading political science and sociology journals from 2000 to 2010, this article considers the extent of this claim. The results show that political science publications involving religious topics have been significantly fewer than those engaging with subjects typically regarded as being more central to the discipline, and markedly less numerous than religious articles in leading sociology publications. Where political science publications have engaged with religious issues, these articles have also focused on a limited number of subject areas and been concentrated in specific disciplinary subfields. The proportion of articles covering religion has shown no real increase since the turn of the century. These findings underpin calls for political scientists to take religious issues more seriously.