Suchergebnisse

Analyzes the British approach to comparative research; based on a survey of major journals and books published in the 1970s and 1980s.

The internationalization of political science makes it especially difficult to identify a distinctive British approach to comparative politics. While there is certainly evidence of a distaste for cross-national comparison in Britain, this is no more marked than in other countries. In fact, on the evidence of a survey of major journals, Britons make relatively heavy use of the comparative method. British comparative research is less likely to use statistical indicators and methods than that found in other countries. Apart from this, the distinctions between comparative politics here and elsewhere are more matters of style and less matters of substance.

Internationalisation of political science makes it difficult to identify a distinctive British approach to comparative politics. On the evidence of a survey of major journals, Britons make relatively heavy use of method. British research is less likely to use statistical indicators and methods than that found in other countries. (Abstract amended)

Comparative method in political science is currently going through a critical time, particularly after the failure of developmentalism, and of the classical paradigm of comparative government. This crisis stems from questioning universalism, mono-determinism and the compartmentalism between political science and history. New paradigms are conceived in order to overcome this. (Abstract amended)

Comparative method in political science is currently going through a critical time, particularly after the failure of developmentalism, and of the classical paradigm of comparative government. This crisis stems from questioning universalism, monodeterminism and the compartmentalism between political science and history. New paradigms are now conceived in order to overcome this crisis: culturalism, social action, historical sociology. Can they be used to construct a new kind of comparison? Can they deal effectively with the new objects of comparison which derive from the increasing differentiation of political situations and political practices that we currently observe?

In political science, comparative method is currently experiencing a crisis, particularly after the failure of developmentalism & the classical paradigm of comparative government, that stems from questioning universalism, monodeterminism, & the compartmentalism between political science & history. New paradigms designed to overcome this crisis are described, including culturalism, social action, & historical sociology. Ways that they can contribute to constructing a new kind of comparison, & whether they deal effectively with the new objects of comparison that derive from the increasing differentiation of political situations & political practices are assessed. Adapted from the source document.

Reviews the development of comparative political science since the 1950s and analyzes the content of journal literature in comparative politics, 1981-97. Based on articles published in Comparative Politics, Comparative Political Studies, and World Politics.

Abstract. The utility of comparative politics has been questioned from time to time in two ways. Doubts have been cast upon its ability to offer genuine and useful generalisations, and these doubts have been reinforced by the appearance of studies which, while statistically adventurous, are not grounded upon a sufficiently sound theoretical base. In this paper we consider Alasdair MacIntyre's objections to the idea of a science of comparative politics, and discuss the nature of law‐like generalisations. We explore the extent to which MacIntyre's objections may be overcome, and indicate the form that generalisations about political stability could take. We also argue that studies of stability need a clear explanatory linkage between the empirical data they utilise and the hypotheses of a theory about political stability. This is often lacking in such studies, which seem to substitute a sophisticated statistical technique for genuine political theory.

First, a summary is offered of Feminist Comparative Policy (FCP) as a relatively cohesive field of emphasis in political science that has emerged from European events largely impelled by European political scientists. The second part considers how FCP fulfills the standards for an effective political science. In arguing for the significance of FCP for European political science, the paper seeks overall to highlight a subfield that has been commonly overlooked or regarded in a parodic or stereotyped fashion. This contribution participates in the ongoing challenge of these pervasive sexist & trivializing attitudes by demonstrating how feminist comparative research is practiced & the role of FCP scholarship within current European political science. References. K. Coddon