Suchergebnisse

This article reviews and summarizes current reproduction and replication practices in political science. We first provide definitions for reproducibility and replicability. We then review data availability policies for 28 leading political science journals and present the results from a survey of editors about their willingness to publish comments and replications. We discuss new initiatives that seek to promote and generate high-quality reproductions and replications. Finally, we make the case for standards and practices that may help increase data availability, reproducibility, and replicability in political science.

The problem of social order is the question of what holds complex and diverse societies together. Today, this question has become increasingly urgent in the world. Yet our ability to ask and answer the question in a helpful way is constrained by the intellectual legacy through which the question has been handed down to us. In this impressive, erudite study, Henrik Enroth describes and analyzes how the problem of social order has shaped concept formation, theory, and normative arguments in political science. The book covers a broad range of influential thinkers and theories throughout the history of political science, from the early twentieth century onwards. Social order has long been a presupposition for inquiry in political science; now we face the challenge of turning it into an object of inquiry.

During the past two decades, mounting evidence suggests that much of human social cognition occurs without deliberate effort and largely outside conscious awareness. Dual-process models, which distinguish explicit (conscious, slow, effortful) cognitive processes from implicit (often unconscious, fast, effortless) cognitive processes, "form the dominant paradigm [of social cognition research] for the past 20 years or more" (Evans 2008). Although these advances in social cognition research have begun to be integrated into models of political cognition over the past decade (e.g., Kim, Taber, and Lodge 2010; Lodge and Taber 2013; see Nosek, Graham, and Hawkins 2010 for a review), and are beginning to influence other disciplines like communication (see Hefner et al. 2011), the role of implicit processes in outcomes commonly studied by political scientists deserves more attention. This symposium aims to showcase the diverse set of subject areas within political science to which dual-process models have been and can be applied. We hope that this symposium is a springboard for those who are considering bringing a dual-process approach into their own research by providing an overview of relevant literatures and methods.

Nine books are reviewed that discuss normative international theory, GB's major contribution to international relations theory. This very positive review covers three studies in the history of international thought, two extremes in current international political theory -- genocide & humanitarian intervention -- & the changing nature of political community. Dunne's book explains roots of international relations, believing that the early philosophers gave little thought to the subject, while Boucher asserts that ancient philosophers contributed significantly to this discipline & Schmidt shows that key concepts came from before the realist-idealist debate of the interwar period. Gourevitch recounts horrifying incidents from Rwanda, showing anger at the international community's inaction. Weiss's book is a study of the challenges faced by humanitarian intervention. Hard Choices is a collection of essays that deal with the moral dimension of humanitarian intervention. Geras addresses indifference to the treatment of the Jews, arguing that social ethics is not natural & requires work. He describes socialism as a moral necessity, a solution that the reviewer refutes. Fifteen essays edited by Archibugi & Kohler confront the belief that globalization is breaking down borders & that democratic governments are challenged. The volume by Linklater, looks to the transformation, not the destruction, of the political community. 10 References. L. A. Hoffman

Sir Isaiah Berlin's pluralistic view of morality, mistakenly opposing theories of human moral development, is discussed as an incompatible combination of Kantian individualism & Herderian pluralism. In the Kantian view of human purposiveness, "negative" liberty is valued more than "positive" liberty, implying some structure of moralty; on the other hand, Herderian pluralism claims that since humans can live in a variety of ways, there is no hierarchy of moral values. The remedy for this contradiction lies in a nonteleological developmentalism, claiming moral obligations as a basis for growth, but with no ethical certainty that one ideal is better than another, since humans develop in diverse & conflicting ways. Liberty, then, is important, not in the sense of a moral hierarchy, but as a basic human value. It is not the goal of development or a thing to be accomplished, but the basis on which accomplishment or development is possible. In Reply to Robert Kocis, Berlin denies any contradiction between Immanuel Kant & Johann Gottfried von Herder, as the freedom of choice to pursue rational goals is complementary to Herder's concept allowing for a variety of goals to exist, & claims never having espoused the notion that no value is better than any other. Certain moral values are preferable to others (especially destructive ones). The causes of these serious misinterpretations are attributed to both the reader & the author. 1 Table. D. Graves.

Describes the Political Science Department's assessment activities for the academic year 2009-2010. ; The Political Science Department's annual assessment report to the College for the Office of Academic Assessment. The report details assessment focused on the critical thinking SLO and an examination of the extent to which their students are developing analytical skills as they progress through the major. As part of this, the report details the department's activities in revising their SLOs to ensure that they are still relevant to the individual classes. The report also deals with the department's participation in the Simplifying Assessment Across the University Pilot Program which asks departments to assess signature assignments from gateway and capstone courses.

This article examines critically Popper's arguments for a "unity of method" between natural science and social science. It discusses Popper's writings on the goals of science, the objects of scientific inquiry, the logic of scientific method, and the value of objectivity The major argument is that, despite his unifying intention, Popper himself provides good reasons for treating the two sciences differently. Popper proposes that social scientists follow a number of rules that are not required for, and that have no direct equivalent in, natural science. For most of the cases examined here, these requirements are not simply marginal amendments to a basic methodological core; they are essentially moral or ethical in character and mark out a radically different intellectual and political enter prise. From this perspective, much of Popper's work on social science method ology has the character of an ethical treatise. It is argued further that Popper's accounts of the differences between natural and social science, and his call for moral responsibility, are based largely upon his understanding of the distinctive political threat that social science poses for the conduct of critical reason.

Since the two critiques [Iain McLean, Samual Postbrief, '"The Scientific Status of Political Science" — Two Comments,' II (1972), 383–8] have little in common, I shall answer them separately beginning with McLean's. The main difficulty with McLean's argument is that he assumes that we know, or can know, that there cannot be a science of politics or, better still, laws of political behaviour as rigorous as the laws of the natural sciences. His assumption is supported by familiar arguments: men are not as passive and as homogeneous as silver nitrate; men have free will and could wilfully go against the predictions of the social scientist if only to show him that their behaviour cannot be predicted.

Describes the Political Science Department's assessment activities for the academic year 2011-2012 ; The Political Science Department's annual assessment report to the College for the Office of Academic Assessment. The Department continued assessing gateway and capstone courses. With these courses, it assessed departmental SLOs and tracked students as they progressed through the major. The department received copies of final exams or papers from seven courses from the Fall 2011 and the Spring 2012 semesters. A random sample of fifteen works per course was chosen. The results were synthesized into charts that show the percentages of works meeting the ???unsatisfactory,??? ???elementary,??? ???developing,??? ???proficient,??? and ???exemplary??? designations. In 2011-2012, the department also continued its participation in the Simplifying Assessment Across the University Pilot Program.

This paper describes misconceptions about the physical sciences that
are widely held by college students and that pose notable hurdles
for appreciating the social sciences as legitimate scientific
enterprises. My purpose here is pedagogical, too. In particular, I
respond to the persuasive, specific argument in prior scholarship
that students must overcome various negative or unconstructive
stereotypes about the physical sciences to achieve scientific
literacy.

"A short, lively and innovative text, this book addresses the question of what constitutes good practice in a variety of political science methods and examines the philosophy that underpins them. It argues for a pluralistic approach that will deliver effective analysis and an in-depth understanding of political events"--

This article compares the scientific publication output and international academic visibility of Swiss political science departments, using three indicators (number of publications, number of citations, and the h-index) and publicly available data from two sources: the ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. We also examine whether the publication output of political science professors and postdoctoral researchers in Switzerland varies as a function of academic age. We observe rather strong variations both across and within departments. The analysis also shows that the most prolific professors tend to be those who completed their Ph.D. about 10-20 years ago and that some postdocs are on a very promising publications trajectory. We derive some benchmarks for publication output that might be useful for hiring decisions or promotions. Adapted from the source document.

The scientific study of politics requires an environment which accepts free inquiry and discussion. Scholars must be permitted to ask questions of their own choosing, gather data without hindrance, and communicate freely with one another about their findings. To be sure, freedom to investigate sensitive policy matters is limited by all governments. Moreover, political scientists themselves inevitably introduce some measure of their own values or ideological predispositions into their works. But it is obvious that without the guarantee of certain minimum freedoms, political science as we know it in the West could never exist.Communist regimes traditionally have made independent inquiry or objective discussion of political phenomena impossible. In the Stalinist period, scholarly analyses of politics—or, for that matter, of aesthetic, literary, moral or economic questions—amounted to little more than doctrinal exegesis or the elaboration of practical measures to implement the Party's demands. An autonomous social science in Stalin's Russia or Eastern Europe was simply unthinkable.Since the dictator's death, however, Communist governments have modified their hostility toward the social sciences in general, and toward political science in particular. A decade of de-Stalinization has been accompanied by steps to encourage the scientific study of politics. In several East European countries, political science now enjoys recognition as a discipline in its own right.This does not mean that political science in Communist countries has freed itself of political controls, or that what is presented as political science is always of scholarly merit.